9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee on January 27, 1993 and a shop inspection report was prepared. Subsequent verification of the books of account with reference to the SIR revealed that the assessee had effected unaccounted purchase and sale of about 23 items. The assessee had admitted the offence and compounded the offence by paying a sum of Rs. 4,540. It has also come out from the check-post declarations that the assessee had purchased groundnut oil from outside the State parties evidenced by five bills to the tune of Rs. 1,95,000. On the basis of these materials, the assessing authority proposed to reject the return and the accounts and to make addition to the estimated turnover on two counts. The first one is on the basis of the discrepancies found in the inspection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28, 2001. But the assessee did not respond to the said notices. Consequently the original assessment was restored. The assessee took up the matter again before the first appellate authority, who with reference to the directions contained in the first appellate order declined to afford any further opportunity to the assessee to establish his case. However the first appellate authority reduced the addition of Rs. 23,40,000 to Rs. 14,04,000, i.e., 10 times the actual sale price of the suppressed transaction was reduced to six times of the said amount. On further appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal also justified the denial of any further opportunity. However, the Tribunal considered the reasonableness of the additions made on account of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons to the said amount was warranted. We have also heard the learned Government pleader appearing for the respondents. He submits that considering the unaccounted transaction found both on the basis of the inspection and on the basis of check-post declarations, the reliefs already granted by the first appellate authority and by the Tribunal are reasonable and no further interference in revision is called for. The Government pleader also pointed out that the check-post declarations related only for a period of one month and that the assessee might have made such transactions during other periods also. We have considered the rival submissions. So far as the addition made on the basis of the inspection conducted on January 27, 1993 and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that the addition made is arbitrary and calls for interference. The Tribunal has only reduced the addition from six times the value determined on the basis of check-post declarations to three times. According to us, the Tribunal should have sustained addition of only the sale value of the purchases covered by the five check-post declarations. In the above circumstances in modification of the order of the Tribunal, we direct the assessing authority to modify the assessment for the year 1992-1993 by adding only the sale value of the purchases covered by the five check-post declarations. This is in addition to the addition of three times the suppressed amount of Rs. 87,615 sustained by the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal shall stand mod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
