TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16, 2002 (annexure P 9), passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax (respondent No. 2) which in turn affirms the assessment order, dated October 23, 1996 (annexure P 6), passed by the Assistant Commissioner (respondent No. 3). 2.. Petitioner is a manufacturer of certain items made out of steel, one such item claims to be manufactured by the petitioner is known as Crowbar . This item ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that they in fact sold the crowbar to the persons mentioned in the invoices. The petitioner did nothing. In other words, the petitioner failed to produce any evidence. As a consequence, the assessing officer concluded the assessment and declined to grant exemption and added the value of the said goods in the turnover by order dated October 23, 1996 (annexure P 6). The petitioner felt aggri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re not genuine. Learned counsel also contended that these sales were made to registered dealers and hence, their genuineness could not have been put to test. In substance, therefore, the submission was for upholding of the sales in favour of the petitioner. 6.. I do not find any merit in the submission though pressed in service with vehemence by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessing authorities and there is material to support the doubt, it is the duty of the dealer (petitioner) to co-operate in the assessment proceedings and satisfy the assessing authority in relation to the doubtful transactions. The petitioner cannot expect the assessing officer to accept the oral version of the petitioner without there being any material which could be tendered by the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
