9911796707
TMI Blog1962 (2) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nth. Sri T. Krishna Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has pressed before us three contentions in support of this revision petition. His first contention was that the reasons given by the Commercial Tax officer for rejecting the accounts submitted by the petitioner are wholly irrelevant. Secondly, he contended that the working expenses is no guide for determining the turnover. Lastly, it was urged by him that the conclusion of the Commercial Tax Officer that the feeding charges of each one of the servants would be about Rs. 30 per month was wholly arbitrary. We shall now proceed to consider each one of these contentions. This is what the Commercial Tax Officer says for rejecting the accounts of the petitioner: "The account books produced were scrutinised. It was seen that not all purchases were supported by purchase vouchers and the sales had not been supported by sales bills. Section 27 of the Act of 1957 required every dealer whose turnover exceeds Rs. 20,000 in any year to issue in respect of all the goods sold by him a bill or a cash memorandum and also to keep the counterfoils or the duplicates of such bill or cash memorandum and since the assessee in question ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and records showing the details regarding their purchases, sales or deliveries of goods in such form and in such manner as may be specified by him. Under section 27, it is laid down: "(1) Every dealer whose turnover exceeds Rs. 20,000 in any year shall, in respect of all goods sold by him, issue a bill or a cash memorandum to the purchaser, signed and dated by him or his servant, manager, or agent showing such particulars as may be prescribed and shall keep the counterfoil or duplicate of such bill or cash memorandum duly signed and dated and preserve it for a period of not less than five years from such date." Sub-section (2) of that section provides: "Any person who contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) shall, on conviction, be punishable with a fine equal to double the amount of the bill or the cash memorandum in respect of which such contravention has occurred or fifty rupees whichever is less." The Rules framed under the Mysore Sales Tax Act prescribe the manner of maintaining vouchers, bills and accounts (rule 26). Our attention has not been invited to any provision either in the Mysore Sales Tax Act or to any of the Rules framed thereunder providing for the rej ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, the decisions of the English Courts on the point under consideration are helpful. The leading case on that point is the one reported in Anderson v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue(2). Therein the Lord President observed: "It may be they did find in fact that the books were badly kept, or that the profit and loss account had not been accurately made out; but, if that is what they meant as a reason for refusing to look at what was undoubted evidence.......... they should have said so. There might then have been no difficulty whatever in sustaining their conclusion, which would have been to some such effect as this: 'The books and accounts you produce are not satisfactory for one reason or another. That being so, we cannot regard them as proving your profits." Lord Sands added: "If the Commissioners had said that they thought the accounts were 'fictitious' or 'cooked', then that would have justified their disregarding these accounts, and, in those circumstances, we might not have been justified in scrutinising the grounds upon which they were proceeding and in considering whether they were supported by evidence which would satisfy a court of law." Lord Morison observe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o way of estimating, which is right or wrong in itself. It is a question of fact and figure whether the way of making the estimate, in any case, is the best way for that case. In making the estimate, the Income-tax Officer acts under section 23(4) of the Act, and he is required under it to make an estimate to the best of his judgment against a person, who is in default as regards supplying information. He must make what he honestly believes to be a fair estimate of the proper figure of assessment, and for this purpose he must be able to take into consideration local knowledge and repute in regard to the assessee's circumstances, and his own knowledge of previous returns by, and assessments of, the assessee, and all other matters which he thinks will assist him in arriving at a fair and proper estimate; and though there must necessarily be guess-work in the matter, it must be honest guess-work." In Income-tax Commissioner, United and Central Provinces v. Badridas Ramrai Shop, Akola [1957] A.I.R. 1937 P.C. 133; 5 I.T.R. 170. , the Judicial Committee observed that the officer is to make an assessment to the best of his judgment against a person who is in default as regards supplying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
