1993 (11) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kottayam, dated March 27, 1992 in T.A. No. 266 of 1991. The respondent is the State. The assessee is a dealer in arrack. We are concerned with the assessment year 1987-88. During the year, the officials of the Sales Tax Department inspected the business place of the assessee on September 24, 1987 and January 16, 1988. During the first inspection on September 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y order dated February 28, 1991, affirmed the compounding proceedings and held that the compounding fee of Rs. 1,00,000 was levied properly. Pages 279 to 283 of the assessment records contain the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax. It is evident that the books of accounts and the returns submitted by the assessee were found to be unreliable. It was held so. The assessing authorit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the Appellate Tribunal is only very minimal and no error in law has been committed by the Appellate Tribunal in sustaining the estimate to 1 times the suppression detected and in exempting 80 per cent of the addition. 4.. The order of the Appellate Tribunal does not disclose any error of law. We dismiss the tax revision case. Petition dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - CST, VAT & Sal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X