TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. On the said finding, the books of account can be rejected but it is not necessary to enhance the turnover. Again this Court in the case of RATAN HARI ROLLING MILLS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, UP., LUCKNOW [ 2007 (1) TMI 539 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] have categorically held that estimate for whole year is not justified when suppression was found in a particular period. Once the findings of fact has been recorded in favour of the petitioner, there is no cogent reason for enhancing the turnover. The tribunal was not justified in confirming the enhancement of turnover in view of the fact that at the time of survey loose papers were found which have been explained by the revisionist and merely on that ground the books of ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakh found to be recorded in the documents seized during the survey, which does not relate to the applicant and which relates to the period prior to the commencement of business of the applicant? C. Whether the tribunal was justified in assessing the undisclosed purchase of cloth and tailoring material and also assessing undisclosed sale of stitched cloth without giving benefit of ITC and when the applicant was only engaged in the business of trading of readymade cloth and no stock of unstitched cloth or tailoring material was found during the survey? D. Whether the tribunal was justified in fixing huge amount of undisclosed purchase and sales of Rs. 26.62 lacs and 57.50 lacs respectively, merely on the basis of surmises and conj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f garments which was not related to the business of the revisionist. She further submitted that revisionist was only engaged in the business of trading of readymade garment; there was no material being found at the time of survey which indicate that the revisionist was doing the business of stitching of cloth or manufacturing of readymade garments. 6. She submitted that in pursuance of said survey, the assessment order was passed on 23.2.2018 rejecting the books of account of the revisionist and enhancing the turnover against which an appeal has been preferred by the revisionist which was partly allowed by the order dated 22.4.2018 to the extent that the first appellate authority has reduced the tax liability by Rs. 1,30,800/-, thereaf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... survey the proprietor of the firm was not available. It is also admitted that at the time of survey six loose papers were found which have been duly explained by the revisionist and on the basis of said survey as well as documents seized by the authorities, the books of account of the revisionist has been rejected and enhancement of turnover has been made. The revisionist has submitted that Sanket no. 1 was only in respect of sale of Rs. 1,09,605/- and recorded for a period of 1.1.2013 to 20.6.2014 and sale of only Rs. 761/- was found to be recorded on 24.9.2014, which has been explained by the revisionist however on the basis of which the best judgement assessment has been made and has been confirmed up to the stage of Tribunal. 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Limited Vs. CCT, 2015 UPTC 1194 have categorically held that estimate for whole year is not justified when suppression was found in a particular period. 14. This Court in the case of M/s Krishna Gramodyog Samiti Vs. C.C.T. 2013 (17) VSTI page 591 has held that best judgement assessment cannot be made in an arbitrary manner simply on the basis of surmises and conjunctures, unless there is some material to support such an assessment. 15. Further this Court in the case of Devi Dayal Aluminimum Industries Vs. CTT, 2008 UPTC page 1306 has held that while estimating turnover, the order should provide some basis otherwise the order would be arbitrary. 16. Again this Court in the case of Shyam Sugar Industries Vs. CST, reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|