TMI Blog1989 (6) TMI 271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ross turnover at Rs. 8,34,789.41 including Rs. 2,000 representing the sale proceeds of a lorry. The dealer under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, claimed for Rs. 3,79,012.75. On this count, the assessing officer allowed the claim only to the extent of Rs. 12,576.75 which represented sales to Messrs. Shree Durga Punching Works. The rest of the claim amounting to Rs. 3,66,436 was disallowed because the payments were made by bearer cheques. The assessing officer found it difficult to rely on the transactions. He, therefore, disallowed the claim to that extent. For late filing of quarterly returns a penalty of Rs. 25 was imposed. The claim under section 5(1)(b) was allowed for Rs. 4,08,906.40. In regard to the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that view of the matter, the Tribunal felt that the applicant should be given an opportunity to agitate the point before the appellate authority. In the result, the revision case was allowed in part on contest. The appellate authority's judgment was partly set aside and the case was remitted to the appellate authority for writing out a judgment regarding the rate of tax on sale of lorry after giving an opportunity to the applicant of being heard. The other part of the order of the appellate authority was confirmed. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned State Representative. There is an apparent contradiction in the order of the Tribunal in so far as the Tribunal felt that no reasonable opportunity was given in regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was not present. This indicates that the officer failed to apply his mind and failed to determine the point involved in the appeal. It was his duty to consider the materials before him, as to whether the claim under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, should or should not be allowed. This he could have done upon his own independent judgment on a perusal of the records. But he did not do so. The learned Tribunal remitted the case to the appellate authority only in so far as the tax on the lorry was concerned. The sale price of the lorry was Rs. 2,000 and the dispute was whether the tax should be assessed at 13 per cent or 15 per cent. If the petitioner's claim for Rs. 3,66,000 and odd could be disallowed, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
