TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (11) TMI 81
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after taking into consideration, the result of the inspection recorded the following findings. (a) At the initial stage, the appellant's daily average sale was Rs. 25. With the gradual trend of increase of estimate, the daily sale from 1st April, 69, to 31st March, 70, is Rs. 60 and this is in respect of grecery articles. (b) In course of inspection on 10th Sep, 72, the dealer admitted that he is dealing in fertilisers. In absence of any accounts is respect of fertiliser trade, the turnover of fertiliser is estimated at Rs. 4,000 during 1969-70. Taking the turnover of grocery and fertiliser into consideration the appellant's turnover reached Rs., 25,600 by 31st March,1970., and hence the appellant is liable form 1st March, 1970. Hence the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterior to effect sale of fertilisers to the cultivators directed in a clandestine manner for which no amount is available. The assessing officer made thorough enquiry as per direction of the first appellate authority and completed the assessment of 1970-71 which is not at all excessive". It is with these remarks, he has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the assessment. 4. In the second appeal the learned counsel appearing for the appellant very strongly contended that there was absolutely no evidence on record to show that the Inspector saw fertiliser at the premises of the appellant on the date of visit. There was also no evidence to show that during the year 1969-70, the appellant dealt in fertilisers. Furthermore he has not estimated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e year 1969 and the Inspector saw the receipt. As per that receipt I have given consent to pay back the price of fertilisers to Sabhamul Co-operative Society." This will go to show that the appellant dealt with some fertilisers which according to him were purchased for his own land. But the date of purchase is missing. It might be that he might have purchased those some times between March, 1969. At least form this statement it does not make necessarily definite that the appellant purchased fertilisers during 1969-70 it is well-known that in case of any doubt, the benefit of doubt would go to the assessee. Here, as there is no definite evidence to show that the appellant purchased fertilisers in 1969-70 and specially when no estimate has b....