9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee. - Tax Case (Revision) No.409 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2013 - Chitra Venkataraman And K. B. K. Vasuki,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. K. Soundararajan For the Respondent : Mr. Manoharan Sundaram Spl. G. P. (Taxes) ORDER (The Order of the Court was made by Chitra Venkataraman, J.) The assesee is on revision as against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment year 2001-2002 raising the following question of law :- "1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal had considered the fact that the alleged inter-State purchase omissions were duly recorded in the book of accounts and the corresponding sales were submitted for assessment at the time of making the original assessment and, therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n made on account of seven slips recovered. As regards the subsequent accounting of the transactions, the First Appellate Authority agreed with the assessee and he deleted further addition made under the head of probable omission. Thus, the First Appellate Authority partly allowed the assessee's appeal. 5. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue went on appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, who pointed out that the assessee had not maintained the godown with proper licence and the details of inter-State sale could not be verified since all the entries were said to be available in the computer, which was stated to be locked under the secret password of the Auditor and in such circumstances, the contention of the assessee that the purchase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax payable in the assessment, no penalty was leviable in the facts of the case. Thus, on penalty, the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal confirmed the order of the First Appellate Authority and granted relief. Aggrieved by this, the assessee has preferred the present Tax Case (Revision) before this Court. 6. As far as the confirming of the assessment on actual suppression is concerned, we do not find any justifiable ground to differ from the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, being it based on facts. But, however, on equal time addition made by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal towards probable omission is concerned, we however agree with the contention of the assessee that when the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal had accepted the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
