9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of invoice and declaration in form 32 and payments to the suppliers are made in cash. The assessing authority noticed that the petitioner's place of business had been visited by the intelligence authorities which had noticed that the petitioner had made purchases from certain dealers and petitioner did not have any documentary proof of having made payment to the above dealers and those dealers were bogus units, non-existent and none of those dealers was having any manufacturing units at the business premises and accordingly the assessing authority after issue of notice under section 12A and thereafter under section 3C of the KST Act, concluded the assessment proceedings by holding that the assessee had failed to prove that the goods h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second dealers and thus it is proved beyond doubt that these declarations are not genuine. The appellant, who is a reputed dealer in furniture, cannot ignore all the details. Further more, furniture to the extent of lakhs of rupees cannot be purchased at the doorsteps of the dealer, that too without recording any details of such purchases in the books of account. The appellant has failed to produce any documentary evidence regarding the payments made to these six dealers who have sold furniture worth Rs. 24,82,900. These discrepancies and short comings are not proved by the appellant. It is contended by the appellant that the assessing authority has not proved that the sellers are bogus dealers. The very fact that the small time manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2005 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bangalore, reiterating the contentions raised before the first appellate authority, viz., the following grounds were raised: 1.. No opportunity was given. 2.. No Intelligence report was made available or supplied to him to file his objection. Both these contentions were examined by the Appellate Tribunal with reference to the assessment records and it was found by the Tribunal that the assessing authority in fact had issued pre-assessment notice which was available in the assessment records to which assessee had not filed any objection and only thereafter assessment was concluded on February 25, 2003. It was noticed by the Tribunal that the appellant therein had not filed any objections to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner have paid the tax and they could not have been doubted by them and accordingly they have made the statement even before the intelligence authority by producing copies of the said form No. 32 both before the assessing authority as well as the intelligence authority, who recorded the statement. It is also contended that had the copy of the intelligence report been furnished to the assessee they would have rebutted the same. The undisputed fact is that even in spite of the proposition notice having been issued and served on the assessee/petitioner, he has not chosen to file any objections to the said proposition notice nor has he sought for obtaining copy of the intelligence report, which is now sought to be made an issue in this revi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
