9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 838X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t sources. We are of the view that the assessee cannot object against Department relying on their accounts maintained in the seized computer. In fact, the first appellate authority took a reasonable stand by giving opportunity to the assessee to prove before the assessing officer that the turnover found in the computer statements covers even the disclosed turnover for the purpose of avoiding duplicity. Thus there was no justification for the Tribunal to interfere with the first appellate authority's order. We, therefore, allow the revision cases filed by the State by reversing the majority order of the Tribunal for both the years and by restoring the appellate authority's order remanding the matter. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the accounted sales, the assessing officer rejected the accounts and estimated turnover by making addition for the actual sales suppression found in the computer statements seized by the Income-tax Department and furnished to the Sales Tax Officer. The assessing officer after collecting details of purchases made by the assessee from Kerala State Beverages Corporation, made assessment of excess quantity of liquor sold over the quantity of accounted sales as first sales of liquor procured by the respondent through illicit channels. When the assessments were questioned in first appeal, first appellate authority, in principle, upheld the rejection of books of account and adoption of turnover based on actual sales seen recorded in the seized co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On going through the Tribunal's order, we find that the Accountant Member who wrote the majority order has accepted the argument of the respondent about the presumption available that Indian-made foreign liquor can only be purchased in Kerala from Beverages Corporation in the following words: "It is a fact that IMFL is a State Government controlled commodity. IMFL can be procured only from Kerala State Beverage Corporation on payment of first point tax. The assessing authority has no case that the assessee have procured IMFL from any other illegal sources without payment of first point tax. Even the Income-tax authorities have also no such case. This Tribunal in many cases in similar issues has taken the view that the first poin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of any excise case there is a presumption that liquor sourced in Kerala is always purchased from the KSBC is untenable. On the other hand, senior counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that Department has not found out any illicit transaction by the respondent in liquor and there is also no excise case against them. He has also relied on decisions of the Supreme Court in Girdhari Lal Nannelal v. Sales Tax Commissioner reported in [1977] 39 STC 30, Rukmanand Bairoliya v. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1971 SC 746, P.C. Ittymathew & Sons v. Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax reported in [2001] 121 STC 1 and the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in B. Satyanarayana Murthy & Sons v. State of A.P. reported in [1984] 57 STC 274 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nspection and noticed stock variation during 2000-01. Further, the assessing officer collected details of purchases of liquor by the assessee from Kerala State Beverages Corporation and found that the quantity and value of liquor sold and seen recorded in the computer is far in excess of the purchases from authorised channels. In our view, the finding of the Tribunal that assessment cannot be sustained in the absence of evidence of physical handling of liquor sourced from unauthorised channels by the respondent is not tenable. In the first place, frequent cases of seizure of illicit liquor, trade in spurious liquor, etc., are reported in Kerala on a regular basis. This court in the decisions abovereferred has taken note of the fact that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by the assessee and seen accounted in the computer, the assessing officer is perfectly justified in relying on the same for making assessment. We are of the view that the sustainable order of the Tribunal is the one issued by the Departmental Member who wrote the dissenting order. Even though senior counsel appearing for the respondent contended that documents seized by the income-tax authorities cannot be relied on in sales tax assessments and in support of the contention he has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in P. C. Ittymathew's case [2001] 121 STC 1, we do not think the said decision applies here because that was a case where the sales tax authorities have drawn certain inferences from disclosures made by the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
