9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 211 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxRejection of books of accounts and the disclosed turnover - day-to-day entries have not been done in the register of raw material - Held that - provisions of section 12(2) of the Act, were not followed by the applicant-assessee. Under the circumstances, the books of accounts were liable to be rejected in the light of the observations made by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P., Lucknow v. Girja Shanker Awanish Kumar 1996 (9) TMI 515 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA . The Tribunal has merely remanded the matter to the first appellate authority to pass a fresh order. - No error in the impugned order of the Tribunal. No question of law is involved in the order of the Tribunal - Decided against assessee.
Issues:
1. Rejection of books of accounts and addition in turnover 2. Discrepancies in stock register maintenance 3. Applicability of section 12(2) of the U. P. Trade Tax Act 4. Legal implications of non-maintenance of stock register 5. Tribunal's remand of the matter to the first appellate authority Analysis: 1. The case involved discrepancies in the maintenance of the stock register by the applicant, who was engaged in the manufacture and sale of tobacco mixed pan masala. The assessing authority rejected the books of accounts and made an addition to the disclosed turnover due to discrepancies in maintaining the stock register of raw material. The applicant contended that rejection of books of accounts and addition in turnover are distinct actions, requiring positive evidence of turnover suppression for the latter. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, but the Commissioner, Trade Tax, preferred a Second Appeal remanded by the Tribunal for fresh consideration. 2. The rejection of books of accounts was based on the undisputed discrepancies in stock register maintenance by the applicant. The failure to maintain the stock register as required by section 12(2) of the Act led to the rejection of the books of accounts. The Tribunal referred to the judgment emphasizing the mandatory nature of section 12(2) and the consequences of non-compliance, supporting the rejection of account books in case of discrepancies in stock register maintenance. 3. The legal implications of non-maintenance of the stock register were highlighted, citing the Supreme Court's stance that the rejection of account books calls for turnover estimation to the best judgment of the assessing authority. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter was based on the failure to provide a cogent basis for estimating turnover and the acceptance of disclosed turnover without proper verification. 4. The judgment also discussed the importance of maintaining a stock register, especially for manufacturers, emphasizing the need for reliable accounts and proper verification of particulars. The failure to maintain such records can lead to the rejection of account books, requiring turnover estimation based on the best judgment of the assessing authority. 5. Ultimately, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter to the first appellate authority for a fresh order. No error was found in the Tribunal's decision, and it was directed that the appeal be decided in accordance with the law, without influence from previous observations. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of discrepancies in stock register maintenance, the legal implications of non-compliance with section 12(2) of the Act, and the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for fresh consideration. The importance of maintaining accurate records and the consequences of failing to do so were central to the decision-making process in this case.
|
