9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 5X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 993 (11) TMI 215 - ORISSA HIGH COURT (Orissa)] could have been appropriate. So the conclusion of the learned Tribunal following the authority is based on no evidence. On the other hand the learned Tribunal has not followed the aforesaid authority properly, but under the veil of such decision has decided the case arbitrarily against the petitioner. So the conclusion arrived at by the learned Tribunal about suppression of the turnover and multiplying it 40 times is based on no factual aspects. Hence the order of the Tribunal is vulnerable, illegal and perverse. - Petition disposed of - STREV No. 112 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - Indrajit Mahanty and Dr. D. P. Choudhury, JJ. For the Petitioner : M/s. Subash Ch. Lal, Sumit Lal and S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paise has to be paid by the petitioner as tax after deducting the tax already paid by the petitioner under rule 36 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules. The petitioner challenged the order of the learned assessing authority before the first appellate authority. The learned first appellate authority observed that the calculation of the assessing authority about suppression of the amount for 26 times is excessive and contrary to the decision of the court. When he found that the enhancement of turnover by 26 times of alleged suppression of ₹ 47,805 is excessive, he limited the enhancement of turnover to ₹ 7,64,881 of which ₹ 6,64,881 is added to the four per cent. tax rate of group, ₹ 1,00,000 is added to the eight per cent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n learned assessing authority computed the suppression 26 times and the first appellate authority computed the same to 16 times. The case of the petitioner should have been accepted as it is a grocery shop and during the visit, the concerned officers have not checked up the grocery items properly about its variety and quantity. He further stated that this is as clear violation of natural justice by the authorities below, for which the order of the Tribunal should be struck down by allowing the revision. The learned standing counsel for the Revenue submitted that the learned assessing authority has gone through the details of the report of intelligence and also has verified the books of accounts, for which the order is legal and proper. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for the whole year at 26 times of the occasional suppression whereas the learned ACST reduced the times to 16. The suppressions having been estimated on 2 (two) occasions the suppression per occasion was for ₹ 23,902.50. Applying the ratio of the decision of the honourable High Court of Orissa in case of State of Orissa v. Ranital Rice Mill [1994] 93 STC 362 (Orissa) 40 times of ₹ 23,902.50, i.e., ₹ 9,56,100 is determined as the suppression for the whole year and the same meets the ends of justice . . . . It appears from the above order of the Tribunal that following the case of Ranital Rice Mill [1994] 93 STC 362 (Orissa) it has increased the suppression by 40 times. There is no any reason assigned in the order exce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imes correcting the finding of the assessing authority, the conclusion of the Tribunal by following the decision of Ranital Rice Mill [1994] 93 STC 362 (Orissa) could have been appropriate. So the conclusion of the learned Tribunal following the authority is based on no evidence. On the other hand the learned Tribunal has not followed the aforesaid authority properly, but under the veil of such decision has decided the case arbitrarily against the petitioner. So the conclusion arrived at by the learned Tribunal about suppression of the turnover and multiplying it 40 times is based on no factual aspects. Hence the order of the Tribunal is vulnerable, illegal and perverse. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Tribunal and remit back the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
