9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 719X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o evade tax. All the particulars have been mentioned in the order. Certain suppressions were even admitted by the petitioner. Perusal of the order indicates that the details of invoices in the purchase stock dealers alone were not the material relied upon and it is found that the request seeking opportunity for cross examination of other dealers is understood as a move to drag on the assessment procedure. Sufficient reasons had been stated to deny permission for cross examination. That apart, petitioner was unable to show that any prejudice has been caused on account of non providing such an opportunity. The Apex Court in CIT v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal [2013 (8) TMI 458 - SUPREME COURT] held that the High Court must not interfere if there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a legal right to demand the materials relied upon by the assessing officer and in the absence of such materials being given and denial of opportunity to cross examine the witness clearly amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. 4. A perusal of Ext.P5 would clearly indicate that the assessing officer has considered the entire issues and had given sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to make out his defence. It is found in Ext.P5 that all the contentions of the petitioner had been met. That apart, it is for the assessing authority to decide whether the request seeking an opportunity for cross examination of other dealers is a move to drag on the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied upon also amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. In Shaduli (supra), the Apex Court observed that if the Sales Tax Officer relies upon evidence furnished by the entries in the books of account of a dealer or dealers for the purpose of coming to the conclusion that the return filed by the assessee was incorrect or incomplete, there is a necessity to provide an opportunity to cross examine such dealers. 7. The facts in the present case would show that purchase and sales suppression were detected by cross verification of purchase list and sales list uploaded with the data in KVTAIS and intercepting the vehicles of the petitioner thrice. Further, the finding is that petitioner was practicing parallel billing in ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
