9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment year 1987-88 assessed the respondent-assessee to sales tax on taxable turnover of Rs. 19,99,920. This was under the following circumstances. The assessee deals in jewellery business and had filed total turnover of Rs. 1,79,605.20 and taxable turnover of Rs. 1,58,669.30, claiming exemption for Rs. 20,935.90. It appears that on February 6, 1988 the Intelligence Officer inspected the place o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as stated above. The first appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Kozhikode, considered the situation and proceeding on the basis that in jewellery cases the turnover can be estimated at 4 to 6 times of the running stock, the appellate authority found that the suppression is huge, unearth on inspection. The appellate authority by the order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detected. It was submitted by placing reliance on the decision that it is difficult to give a long rope to the assessing officer to enter into an estimate which would be wild, arbitrary and capricious. It was submitted that estimate has a basis of reasonableness with reference to the detected situation. It was submitted that the difference even on the basis of opening and closing stock as can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ximately valued at Rs. 43,000. On facts the Tribunal considered that wilful suppression cannot be attributed and could be also considered to be an accidental omission. The Tribunal also observed that there was only shop inspection and in regard thereto 11.350 gms. as regards new gold ornaments, stock difference could be located. On a rounded off figure it was valued at Rs. 23,600. In the above sit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wards the actual omission and suppression of Rs. 66,500. 8.. Taking into consideration factual peculiarities as considered by the Tribunal even though it is obvious that this amount of Rs. 43,000 could not be considered as suppression, we do not think that there is any reason to interfere in exercise of powers under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. Revision case stands dismissed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
