9911796707
TMI Blog1966 (7) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y appeared from the bill books were Rs. 3,12,250-3-6. As he did not maintain accounts, the Sales Tax Officer made best judgment assessment under section 11(4) of the Act by increasing the sale by 10 per cent. and he adopted the turnover of Rs. 3,43,475-0-0. It appeared that the assessee's case was that the goods worth Rs. 2,56,892-15-3 were exported by him outside the State and in proof of this he produced railway receipts despatch book. The Sales Tax Officer, however, was not satisfied that the entire export was made outside the State. He only allowed a portion of the claim. He assessed the total tax at Rs. 5,497-7-0. As the petitioner had failed to furnish the return as required by the Act in time, he levied a penalty of Rs. 600. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of goods which the petitioner alleged were exported and asked for the opinion of the High Court, whether under the circumstances of the case, those sales were also exempted. The High Court, by its judgment, dated 28th July, 1964, held that those sales were also exempt from sales tax. After the matter went to the Tribunal, the Tribunal in accordance with the judgment of the High Court directed modification of the levy of the tax. The petitioner before the Tribunal argued that even the increases made by the Sales Tax Officer on the basis of best judgment assessment under section 11(4) of the Act were covered by the High Court judgment. He also challenged the levy of penalty. The Tribunal held that the matter was not urged before the High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statement. The assessee had sold in the second assessment year goods worth Rs. 3,620 to registered dealers in the State itself. Apart from this, unless, as we have said, he actually proves the export, he is not entitled to deduction and, in fact, as he proved the export in the second and the third cases of goods worth Rs. 3,08,829-10-3 and Rs. 3,53,382-1-3 by the production of railway receipts, he is entitled to deduction only in respect of those sales. This contention, therefore, must necessarily fail. Mr. Thakar then has contended that inasmuch as the maximum penalty that can be imposed under section 10 is 1/4th of the actual tax leviable as the tax is reduced because of the judgment of this Court in the reference, the penalty levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
