2018 (2) TMI 1429

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... took a stand that in respect of any suppressed turnover, which was not declared as part of the compounding proceedings, the benefit of the rate of tax applicable to compounding provision would not be applicable. The judgment under review does not call for any interference - review petition dismissed.
MR. A. K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. For The PETITIONER : Sri.K.I.Mayankutty Mather And Sri. P. Rahul For The RESPONDENT : Sri. Shamsudheen V. K. ORDER These review petitions are filed seeking a review of the judgment dated 10.08.2017 that dismissed the writ petitions, on the ground that, the issue involved in these writ petitions are squarely covered against the petitioner by the decision of the Division Bench in Silver Line Villas & Apa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioner, I find that, the judgment under review was passed relying on that portion of the judgment of the Division Bench, which took a stand that in respect of any suppressed turnover, which was not declared as part of the compounding proceedings, the benefit of the rate of tax applicable to compounding provision would not be applicable. As a matter of fact, this Court has in the judgment dated 05.07.2017 in W.P(C).No.15610 of 2015 again taken a similar stand while dealing with a case of suppression in respect of a dealer, who had chosen to pay tax on compounded basis, and observed as follows in paragraph 4 of the said judgment: "4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7; 74,40,786.89/-. The suppressed turnover, together with the additions made by the assessing officer based on the said suppression, fell outside the ambit of the option exercised, to pay tax on compounded basis, and hence, the assessing authority was justified in imposing tax at regular rates, as applicable under Section 6(1), to the turnover not covered by the application for payment of tax on compounded basis. In the instant case, however, I find from Ext.P1 order that the assessing officer has adopted the higher rate of tax on the entire turnover, including the turnover that was declared by the assessee for the purposes of exercise his option to pay tax on compounded basis. This, in my view, is erroneous and the assessing officer ought .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X