9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 668X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings was not challenged by the petitioner in further proceedings. The Assessing Authority has merely adopted the same gross profit as was estimated by the Intelligence Officer and it is found difficult to accept an argument against such estimation in the assessment proceedings when there was no such dispute raised by the assessee against the estimation done for the purposes of penalty. Secondly, the estimation of gross profit by the Intelligence Officer/Assessing Authority has not resulted in the adoption of an unreasonably higher rate of gross profit than what was already conceded by the petitioner towards sales of IMFL and Beer. No doubt, in circumstances where the gross profit estimated by the revenue authorities is significan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the conceded gross profit by the petitioner was 198.99% and 136.95% respectively in respect of IMFL and Beer, the Intelligence Authorities recomputed the gross profit at 206.33% and 148.93% respectively. Based on the said re-computation, the Intelligence Officer imposed a penalty of ₹ 56,512/- on the petitioner being double the amount of tax allegedly evaded by the petitioner. It is not in dispute before us that the said order of penalty was not challenged by the petitioner in further proceedings. 3. On the penalty file being forwarded to the Assessing Authority, the Assessing Authority called for the books of accounts of the petitioner for the year 2013-2014 and on verification of the same, the Assessing Authority found that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es below. The Tribunal therefore proceeded to dismiss the second appeal preferred by the petitioner. 5. Before us, it is the submission of Sri. Harisankar V. Menon, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the Tribunal erred in accepting the estimation of gross profit by the Assessing Authority. It is in particular pointed out with reference to the following judgments (i) Kalika Hotel and Bar Amballur (supra) (ii) judgment dated 25/6/2020 in S.T. Rev. No.25/2019 (M/s.Sams Property Developers Hotels (P) Ltd., v. State of Kerala) and (iii) judgment dated 20/10/2020 in S.T. Rev. No.13/2020 (M/s.Hotel Luciya Drive Inn v. State of Kerala) that the estimation of gross profit should have been done by consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
