9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (12) TMI 217X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ys, Cochin and Rukmini Steel Industries Ltd., Cochin, in the first year and from these three dealers and from Standard Dealers, Palakkad, in the subsequent three years. The case is that these dealers purchased the goods locally from M/s. Loharu Steel Industries and that they have paid the tax due on the sales effected by them to the assessee. The assessee's case therefore is that they were not the first sellers of these iron and steel materials and that their sales could not be brought to tax under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. 2.. The Revenue on the other hand takes the stand that the purchases effected by the assessee were all purchases in the course of inter-State trade resulting in the assessee being the first seller of thes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for the year 1981-82 with the result the Tribunal went into a discussion of the matter as if it was coming up for the first time for decision. Normally what the Tribunal should have done in deciding this question as to whether the assessee was the first seller in the State was to render a decision first on the facts situation in the case. Instead of that what the Tribunal did was to embark on a discussion of the law on the point relating to inter-State sales, making incidental observations in paragraphs 10 and 11 that the case of the assessee was different from those decisions. All that the Tribunal did was to observe that there was no evidence of payment to outside supplies and that the assessing authority was not able to import any cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact in the first instance as to the nature of the transactions of the assessee in relation to the disputed sales and purchases. Without such a finding being arrived at, it will not be possible for this Court to render a decision on the question arising in these tax revision cases. We are therefore constrained to remit the matters back to the Tribunal for considering the matters afresh, to decide in the first instance as to the nature of the transactions of the assessee and then to apply the law and arrive at a decision whether the assessee is the first seller within the State liable to tax under the Act. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of these cases in view of the conflicting findings rendered by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r addition of one-third. But, we find no substance in this contention. The books of accounts were unreliable and unacceptable. There is no dispute that the total purchase of the taxable items as per the books was Rs. 18,14,502.73. Even this is not acceptable for the reason that the books are not correctly maintained. There is no mention about the alleged closing stock figures of which are not available. In the circumstances the assessing authority was justified on the basis of the information gathered from the inspection that the sales amounted to Rs. 19,61,070.98 based on the assessee's figures of purchase and the profit estimated, which is only 3 per cent. Necessarily addition had to be made because of the unacceptability of the books a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
