9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 3 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxEscaped turnover of purchases and sales - validity of tribunal order - Held that - The order of the Tribunal is totally silent on the basis of which this was arrived at. - The principles applicable to an assessment taken to the best of judgment are no longer res integra. - Following the decision in the case of State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty 1965 (12) TMI 32 - SUPREME Court , mater remanded back - Decided in favor of assessee.
Issues:
1. Validity of the Tribunal's order modifying the assessment made against the revisionist for the assessment year 2001-02. Detailed Analysis: The revisionist, engaged in the manufacture and sale of iron steel sheets, was exempted under section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act 1948. The assessing authority found discrepancies in the accounts during a survey, particularly focusing on Exhibit-4, which showed an unaccounted sale of 72 tons valued at ?4,58,327. The assessing authority proceeded to reject the books of accounts based on these undisclosed sales and purchases, estimating the purchase for four months at ?23,00,000 and sale at ?25,00,000. The first appellate authority upheld this decision, leading the revisionist to appeal to the Tribunal, which reduced the undisclosed purchases and sales to ?12,50,000 and ?11,50,000, respectively. The Tribunal found the assessing authority's estimation of turnover for four months unjustified as the undisclosed transactions were limited to two months. It also noted no evidence of tax evasion post the survey date. Despite these findings, the Tribunal did not provide a basis for the revised figures. Citing legal precedents, the Court emphasized that a best judgment assessment must be based on relevant material and reasonable judgment, not arbitrary decisions. The Court referred to cases highlighting the importance of a fair and reasoned assessment based on all available information. The Court held that the Tribunal's order was unsustainable as it lacked a proper basis for the revised figures. Consequently, the Court allowed the revision, setting aside the Tribunal's order and remanding the matter for a fresh decision in line with the legal principles discussed in the judgment.
|
