2018 (12) TMI 300

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ith the permission granted. Notice was issued under Section 22(3) directing production of the works contract agreement, work schedule and related documents in support of the conceded contract amount of Rs. 30,00,000/-, as per the returns filed by the assessee. 2. The assessee failed to produce the books of accounts in which event, the Assessing Officer made a best judgment assessment and estimated the probable omission and suppression at Rs. 30,00,000/-; an equal addition. In the process of making the assessment, the Assessing Officer merely proceeded for regular assessment without taking into account the permission granted for compounding. In appeal, the First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal and the assessee was before the Tribun .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntracts carried out by the assessee? 5. We will deal first with the assessee's revision which we are of the opinion poses no question of law. The assessee had applied under the compounding scheme under Section 8 of the KVAT Act, 2003 and had been granted permission to pay tax at the compounded rates. As has been found by the Tribunal, the assessee cannot turn around and challenge such benefit availed on the assessee's own application especially after the assessment year is over. Further but for the bland assertion the assessee produced nothing to substantiate the contention of labour contracts. In such circumstance, we reject O.T.Rev.No. 7/2016. 6. On the question of law raised by the State in its revision it has to be noticed tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or reason of nonproduction of books of accounts. We also do not see any reasoning for such deletion. The Tribunal had merely noticed that there was no reason to discredit the compounding permission granted and that alone would not be sufficient ground to delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer on best of judgment. We hence restore the addition made for probable omission and suppression at the equal amount. 8. For the estimation made, the tax would have to be levied at the regular rates. In that context, necessarily deductions have to be made under Rule 10 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 for which alone the matter is remanded to the Assessing Authority. We hence answer the question of law framed partly in favour of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X