9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (11) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Tax Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the orders passed in revision, only modifying and not setting aside in toto the orders of assessment passed by the Sales Tax Officer, have been challenged. The assessment orders were passed with regard to two periods being 27th November, 1976 to 11th November, 1977 and 12th November, 1977 to 31st October, 1978. 2.. The petitioner carri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of M/s. Ghanshyamdas Basantlal. It was also stated on his behalf that some money had been obtained from M/s. Ghanshyamdas Basantlal which was a firm of the uncle of the petitioner and that considerable number of bricks were handed over to Ghanshyamdas Basantlal for sale. 4.. The case set up by the petitioner did not find favour with the Sales Tax Officer, nor in revision with the Divisional De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity was given to the petitioner and it was the petitioner himself who did not avail of the opportunity. 7.. It was then urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was not made aware of the contents of the affidavit filed on behalf of M/s. Ghanshyamdas Basantlal. We find it difficult to agree with this submission either. On a perusal of the impugned order passed in revisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stands admitted by the petitioner that he was specifically asked about the said account books and loose papers and he denied any connection with them. After this reply made by the petitioner that he had no connection with the said account books or loose papers, there was hardly any occasion for putting any further question to the petitioner with regard to those account books and loose papers. 9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
