9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (6) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f all these and after taking into account the sales slips for the period from October 23, 1978 to March 31, 1979, it was noticed that actual suppression as per the sales slips found out was Rs. 87,074.61. An equal sum was added for the period not covered by the slips. The assessing authority determined the total and taxable turnover of the petitioner at Rs. 8,26,169 and Rs. 1,97,603, respectively. A penalty under section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, at 1 times the tax due on actual suppression (Rs. 5,226) was also levied. 2.. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the first appellate authority. The said authority was of the view that the turnover found in the slips that could be attributed to chillies ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ression for the period prior to October 23, 1978. The Tribunal also took note of the rival decision reported in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali [1973] 32 STC 77 (SC). On the above view, the Tribunal while sustaining the addition on the basis of the slips at Rs. 51,105 determined by the first appellate authority considered it necessary to add for probable suppression for the period prior to October 23, 1978, an equal sum thus revising the estimate of the suppressed turnover at Rs. 1,02,210 taxable at 4 per cent in respect of chillies. The claim of the petitioners for reduction of the penalty as well as the request of the Revenue for enhancement of the penalty was rejected. Aggrieved, the above tax case (revision) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal prior to the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1982 to entertain any application for enhancement. We are afraid we can countenance such a plea in the teeth of a well-considered decision of a Division Bench of this Court reported in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Panayappan Leather Industries [1981] 47 STC 88, wherein it has been held very clearly that on the language contained in section 36(3)(a)(i) of the Act, the power to enhance the assessment is vested in the Tribunal itself, and that the procedure of filing an enhancement petition is merely by way of putting the assessee on notice that in the appeal preferred by the assessee the Revenue is going to request the Tribunal to enhance the assessment, so that the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
