9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordingly, dismissed. - - - - - Dated:- 19-9-2007 - 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 September 7, 1999 relating to the assessment year 1998-99, by which Tribunal has deleted the penalty under section 15A(1)(c) of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that the opposite party/dealer (hereinafter referred to as the dealer ) was carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of paints and disclosed taxable turnover at Rs. 1,58,94,193. The assessing authority rejected the books of account and estimated the turnover at Rs. 1.62 crores by way of best judgment assessment. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing authority levied a sum of Rs. 91,800 towards penalty under section 15A(1)(c) of the Act taking the enhanced turnover at Rs. 3,05,877 as suppressed sales. Being aggrieved by the order, the dealer filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), which was dismissed. The dealer filed second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the appeal of the dealer and the penalty was deleted. Heard Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel and Sri K. Saxena, learned counsel for the opposite party. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that on the basis of the adverse material found at the time of survey dated June 6, 1993, the inference drawn by the assessing authority was justified and the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PTC 854, it has been held that merely because the turnover has been enhanced by rejecting the explanation of the dealer in respect of the documents found at the time of survey, it cannot be inferred that the turnover has been concealed in the absence of any specific material of concealment. In the present case, perusal of the assessment order reveals that the adverse inference has been drawn after rejecting the explanation in respect of the stock found at the time of survey dated June 6, 1993 and exhibit 8, which was the note book. Tribunal having regard to the entire facts and circumstances held that the dealer had not concealed any turnover and accordingly, deleted the penalty. Learned Standing Counsel is not able to show anything to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
