9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 25 per cent towards the purchase turnover of chicken, fish, prawn, etc. Further, so far as the liquor is concerned, 25 per cent addition to the turnover was made. The matter was taken in appeal. The appellate authority enhanced the sales turnover of Indian-made foreign liquor by 5 per cent towards omission and suppression and subjected to tax. The estimation of 25 per cent gross profit to the purchase cost of liquor made by the assessing authority was held to be without basis. The sales turnover of soda and soft drinks was enhanced by 10 per cent and subjected to tax. So far as the cooked food is concerned, the appellate authority held that there has to be an increase in the turnover. 2.. The matter was taken before the Tribunal. Before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of accounts is concerned, we are satisfied that no points have been made by the assessee to interfere with the concurrent orders passed by the authorities below. The accounts have been rejected on the ground that a number of irregularities have been detected. We also agree with the authorities below. The next contention is with regard to the addition sustained by the first appellate authority with regard to the Indian-made foreign liquor. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is only a second seller and the second seller is not subject to any tax. Further it was submitted that the liquor can be purchased only from the Beverages Corporation, which is a Governmental agency and nothing has been produced to show that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rding to us, normally, since the Beverages Corporation is the first seller, there cannot be any tax when the liquor is sold by the dealer at stage No. 2. Following the Division Bench decision in Lovely Thomas v. State of Kerala [1999] 113 STC 505 (Ker), we are of the view that the respondent has to adduce some evidence to establish that unaccounted purchases had been made by the petitioner. Hence, we are of the view that the addition made for the liquor cannot be sustained. 6.. So far as the next contention is concerned, the case of the petitioner is that the meat is an exempted item under Schedule III to the Act. Hence, according to the petitioner, exemption ought to have been granted for the purchase turnover of chicken. We are not able ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
