9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel, they were heard together. 3. The facts giving rise to the present litigation, in a nutshell, are as under : The appellant - assessee has been registered under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as well as under the Delhi Value Added Tax, 2004 and is carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of sweets, namkeens and other eatables. On 9th March, 2000 and 10th March, 2000, officers from the office of the Commissioner of Sales Tax had visited business premises of the appellant-firm and had recorded statements of partners of the appellant-firm and had also checked total cash inflow on those days. On those two days, sale proceeds were Rs.2,13,974/- (Rupees two lac thirteen thousand nine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the actual stock and stock as per books of accounts were not same. Thus, once again it was found that the books of accounts maintained by the appellant-assessee were not in order. In spite of issuance of notice and giving hearing to the appellant-assessee firm, sufficient explanation was not provided to the Assessing Officer and therefore, assessment for Assessment Year 1999-2000 was made under Section 23(3) of the Act. As the Assessing Officer had come to a conclusion that correct books of accounts had not been maintained, penalty was also imposed upon the assessee by assessment order dated 31.12.2001 for the said assessment year. Similarly, for the Assessment-Year 2000-2001 also, the books of accounts had not been maintained properly. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. As no notice was given to the assessee before the assessment, the impugned assessment orders as well as the orders passed in appeal are bad in law. Thereafter, it had been submitted that merely on the basis of two visits to the business place of the appellant-assessee, the Assessing Officer could not have jumped to a conclusion that the sale proceeds received on those two days were standard or normal and therefore, on the basis of those sale proceeds, assessments could not have been made. It had been further submitted that in the business of the assessee, being a dealer in eatables, normally there would be huge variation in sale on different days. On a particular day, sale proceeds could be more than rest of the days and therefore, on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Rs.1,98,009/- respectively whereas total sales for the said year was much less. In the aforestated circumstances, average sale of the aforestated two days was calculated and multiplying the same by 365 (days of the year), the Department had arrived at a figure of estimated sales for the year 1999-2000 and similarly after making a reasonable addition of 10%, sale for the Assessment Year 2000-2001 had been arrived at. 8. In spite of the notice issued to the assessee for giving explanation with regard to the discrepancy, the assessee could not give any satisfactory explanation and therefore, the Assessing Officer was constrained to presume that the books of accounts were not maintained properly by the appellant- assessee. 9. As the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Assessing Officer had come to a conclusion that the sale proceeds or sales of the appellant-assessee for the year should have been a particular amount and, in fact, the amount reflected in the books of accounts was much less than the calculations arrived at by the Assessing Officer. (ii) It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer did not jump to a conclusion without any rhyme or reason. The Assessing Officer had called upon the assessee to explain the difference but the assessee could not or did not give sufficient explanation as to how the total sale on the basis of the average daily sale arrived at by the Assessing Officer was not correct. One can very well presume that in case of a dealer dealing in eatables, and specially ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer had rightly come to the conclusion that the books of accounts were not properly maintained and were not reflecting each and every transaction, in our opinion, the Assessing Officer had rightly come to a conclusion that total possible sale was much higher and the conclusion so arrived at was based on sound reasons. We also do not agree with the learned counsel for the assessee that proper adjustments regarding sales tax had not been made by the Assessing Officer in the process of the assessment. (v) Once it is found that with some oblique motive, effort was made to show lesser sale proceeds than the actual, the orders imposing penalty can not be questioned. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere even with the quantum of penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
