9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Being a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 respondent was liable to maintain proper books of account. The Intelligence Officer of the Department conducted inspection on February 26, 1992 and it was noticed that respondent was not maintaining any books of account in the place of business. When stock was verified, shortage of 70 litres of arrack was noticed. Further, respondent had not accounted purchase of any soda, soft drinks, arishtam, etc., which according to the assessing officer are indispensable in the line of business carried on by the respondent. Admittedly there was non-maintenance of books of account and respondent admitted the offence and remitted a compounding fee of Rs.1,500. Since the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year, i.e., Rs. 146 per litre and he determined the first sales of arrack on this basis. When the assessee filed appeal before the appellate authority, the appellate authority reconsidered the whole issue and though confirmed rejection of books of account and estimation of turnover, granted the benefit of higher rate prevalent in the market, i.e., Rs. 169 per litre for the purpose of determining turnover on first sales. While the assessee filed second appeal, the department appears to have accepted the first appellate order. The Tribunal confirmed rejection of books of account and estimation of turnover, but refixed the sale value at Rs. 255 by taking into account the kist amount and substantially allowed the claim. Against this, the Depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss of whatever is the accounts maintained by the respondent and it was rightly rejected by the assessing officer, confirmed in first appeal and second appeal. The only question to be considered is whether the Tribunal had any material to reject the orders of the two lower authorities and in adopting a different method for estimating the unaccounted first sales turnover of arrack. The only principle applied by the Tribunal in arriving at a possible sale price of arrack at Rs. 255 per litre is by loading kist amount to the market price of arrack sold by other dealers. However, strangely the Tribunal has not taken note of the fact that kist is paid by every licencee and therefore, prevailing market price applied by the assessing officer and fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maintain substantially higher price for the same product. Therefore, retail price is market regulated and it is always arrived at by the licencees by taking their cost including kist. Therefore, we find the order of the Tribunal fixing the market price of arrack sold by the respondent at Rs. 255 per litre while highest market price of arrack prevalent in the taluk during the year was Rs. 165, is arbitrary and untenable. We find there is a tendency among departmental officers and the Tribunal to assume that all liquor sold in the State are obtained through proper channels because if unaccounted purchase and sales are concluded, the same will make the licencee-dealer an offender under the Abkari Act. However, cases of detection of sale of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
