9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y justification for the rejection of books of account and for estimating the suppressed sales at ₹ 35 lacs.In the result, revision is allowed. Order of the Tribunal is set aside so far as the rejection of books of account and the estimate of suppressed sales at ₹ 35 lacs is concerned. The Tribunal is directed to pass appropriate order under section 11(8) of the Act. - - - - - Dated:- 13-9-2007 - RAJES KUMAR , J. RAJES KUMAR J. Present revision under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated December 19, 2006 relating to the assessment year 2000-01. The applicant was engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of iron and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal has held that the penalties against the seizure of the goods were quashed and no adverse inference against such seizure was drawn. He submitted that the only ground taken for the rejection of books of account is the difference in the return version and book version and on the said ground alone upheld the estimate of suppressed sales at Rs. 35 lacs. He submitted that the estimate of turnover disclosed as per books of account was higher than the turnover disclosed in the returns. It was explained that due to the mistake of the accountant, lesser turnover was disclosed in the return. Since as per books of account higher turnover has been disclosed, it cannot be said to be a case of suppression of turnover. He submitted that no defect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Oil Mills v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [1986] 1 TNC 78, Indian Steel Traders v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [1986] ATJ 418, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Kanpur Glass House reported in [1986] STR 148, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Agarwal Brothers reported in [1985] 13 STL 81 (All), Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Durga Galla Bhandar reported in [1984] ATJ 332, Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Ashok Kumar Santhosh Kumar reported in [1983] STI 50 (All), Pawarooram Gaya Prasad v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [1982] UPTC 438, Mathura Prashad Shyamlal v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [1982] UPTC 782, Eastern Tube Company v. Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [1980] UPTC 132, Sesh Mani Raj Mani v. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
