9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing authority to the revisionist and in response to the said notice, the revisionist had disclosed gross and net sales of Rs. 7,94,363 and Rs. 7,87,922, respectively. The assessing authority after taking into account the fact and the material evidence on record rejected the book version of the revisionist and determined the net turnover of Rs. 15,00,000 and on the basis of the same by way of best judgment passed the assessment order dated June 23, 1999 thereby creating demand of Rs. 34,203. Aggrieved by the said order, an appeal under section 9(1) of the Act was filed against the above order before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Trade Tax, Lucknow and the same was dismissed by order dated March 19, 2001. Order dated March 19, 2001 was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd further the revisionist has sought for an opportunity to cross-examine the person furnishing such material but the same was allowed. As such the said action is against the principle of natural justice and the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. In view of the above, learned counsel for the revisionist has pressed the present revision on the following grounds: "(i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal was legally justified to reject the book version and make best judgment assessment on the basis of the unnumbered bills furnished by the complainant to the Trade Tax Officer (S.I.B) alleging them to relate to the revisionist without supplying the copies of such bills to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that no material can be relied with which the assessee is not confronted. In the case of Pawan Kumar Sandeep Kumar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1986] UPTC 309 this court has held that it is well-settled that in case the authorities want to rely on, the entries made in the books of account of third person and if the assessee makes a request to cross-examine the said person, the authority should afford an opportunity to the assessee. In these cases, since the request was made by the assessee before the assessing authority himself, the assessing authority should have summoned the proprietor/partner of M/s. Mool Chand Multan Singh for cross-examination. Since that has not been done, in my opinion, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een provided to the revisionist to put forth his case before the enquiry officer in order to investigate the same but the assessee himself with oblique motive and purpose has not availed of the said opportunity. As such now the assessee cannot make a grievance that he has not been provided any opportunity in the present case. The said findings of fact recorded by the assessing authority were confirmed by the appellate authority as well as by the Tribunal by dismissing the second appeal by order dated June 4, 2003. Further, on the basis of the material on record after rejection of the book version of the revisionist, the assessing authority on the basis of the turnover passed the best judgment against the assessee which was confirmed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
