9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1062X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dopted by the Intelligence officer, were the most moving brands in the Bar of the dealer. The Assessing Officer ought to have applied his mind and not adopted the findings in the penalty proceedings as conclusive. As to the stock variation having resulted only an equal addition; the Assessing Officer could have made a further addition for the variations undetected, which were probable. Having not done that, the State cannot argue that the enhancement of gross profit is also taking into account the stock variation; which reasoning, in any event, is not available in the order of the Assessing Officer. The question of law has to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department - Revision allowed. - S.T.Rev.Nos.13/2020, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 66%. In the earlier year there was also a stock difference of ₹ 3,006/- detected at the time of inspection. S.T.Rev.No.14 of 2020 is with respect to another dealer, who is the revision petitioner. The gross profit adopted was at the rate of 88% as against the conceded gross profit of 78.29%. A variation of stock, to the tune of ₹ 24,774/-, was also detected at the time of inspection. Additions were made estimating the gross profit and equal amount of the suppression found. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri.Harisankar V. Menon relied on Kalika Hotel and Bar, Amballur (M/s.) v. State of Kerala [2012 (3) KHC 85 (DB) and M/s.Sams Property Developers Hotels (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala [S.T.Rev.No.25 of 2019 connect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice that, as has been held in Kalika Hotel and Bar, Amballur (M/s.) and M/s.Sams Property Developers Hotels, the gross profit conceded in all the assessment years is more than the gross profit expected by the Government, for the business in specific areas, as revealed from the provision for compounding, which enables an option to pay tax at a certain percentage of the purchase turnover. The compounding provision clearly shows the gross profit normally expected, which is lower than that conceded. 7. As to the stock variation having resulted only an equal addition; the Assessing Officer could have made a further addition for the variations undetected, which were probable. Having not done that, the State cannot argue that the enhancement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
