9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f groundnut oil worth Rs. 56,500 which is not supported by purchase bills or way bills and not accounted for in the books of account by the time of inspection. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner questioning the estimated suppression added by the assessing authority at 10 times of the actual suppression. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner came to the opinion that the estimated suppression 10 times of the actual suppression relates to turnover of Rs. 6,21,600 and out of such estimated suppression there was justification for only one time addition to the tune of Rs. 56,475 and 10 times addition is unjustified. Accordingly, he allowed the appeal in part relating to turnover of Rs. 5,65,125 and dismissed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers under section 21(4) of the Act under which the Tribunal has power to enhance, annul and pass such order as it deems fit with regard to the matter before it? 3.. Whether the Tribunal failed to see that assessment under the Act particularly in regard to turnover is only by one proceeding as held by this honourable Court in [1988] 68 STC 126 (Andhra Steel Corporation Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer) and that in petitioner's case the assessment has culminated in T.A. No. 365 of 1985 and consequently revision order of the Joint Commissioner is without jurisdiction? 4.. Whether the Tribunal is correct in holding that the restoration of estimated turnover by Joint Commissioner for 10 months preceding the date of inspection is justified in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by the Tribunal in exercise of the power conferred upon it under section 21 of the Act. In other words, unless the Appellate Tribunal under section 21 has entertained an appeal on an issue or question or such a question or issue is already decided by the Appellate Tribunal, applying the bar contained under sub-section (2-A), against the revisional power conferred upon the authorities under the Act under section 20 of the Act does not arise at all. In this precise background, we have to look at the admitted facts in this case as already pointed out supra. 5.. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner in the appeal preferred by the petitioner-assessee against the assessment order granted the relief partially, that is to say, he found fault with a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oper, when it heard the appeal of the petitioner on the earlier occasion, to enhance the assessment by adding 10 times estimated addition and in that view of the matter it should be held that the Appellate Tribunal when it decided the appeal put its stamp of authority to the decision of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and if it is so held the bar contained in sub-section (2-A) of section 20 of the Act gets attracted and it ousts the jurisdiction of the Joint Commissioner, C.T., Legal. This contention of the learned counsel is not well-founded. We say this because, sub-section (4) of section 21 is only an enabling provision which empowers the Appellate Tribunal either suo motu or on an application to enhance the assessment, etc. Simply bec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
