9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concerned is 1994-95. The assessee filed return for the said year disclosing a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 1,87,49,763.38 and Rs. 1,16,06,942 respectively. There was an inspection of the business premises of the assessee on May 26, 1995. The assessee had also compounded the offence and paid a compounding fee of Rs. 68,492. On the basis of the materials gathered in the inspection and the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 1 times of the suppression found. The assessee's appeal was dismissed. 3.. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no inspection of the business place of the assessee during the assessment year, in question and that the alleged suppression found in the inspection conducted by the Intelligence Squad on May 26, 1995 after the close of the assessment year cannot be made use o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad limited the addition to 1 times the suppression as against three times made by the assessing authority. 5.. As we have already noted the only basis on which the addition of Rs. 13,99,314 made was the actual suppression of Rs. 4,66,438 found at the time of inspection and the compounding of the offence by paying Rs. 68,492. Admittedly the inspection was made after the close of the assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irst appellate authority has done. The Tribunal, according to us, has wrongly relied on the decision of this Court in V.A. Augustaine and Co. v. State of Kerala [1975] 36 STC 257. If as a matter of fact an inspection was conducted during the assessment year in question and unaccounted transaction was found there was justification on the part of the assessing authority to presume that similar unacc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
