9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore dated March 13, 2000 passed in Appeal No. 101 of 1998 raising the following substantial question of law: "Whether the Tribunal has legally erred in having applied Explanation to section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which provision came into force only from April 1, 1996 whereas the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pression. Penalty under section 12(3)(b) was also levied, thus resulted in the best of judgment assessment. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who, rejected the appeal pointing out that there was a clear-cut suppression and justified the assessing authority's view in making equal addition and not discussed anything regarding penalty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s being subjected to penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the Act. If the tax paid as per the return fell short of on the turnover which was not disclosed, then the assessing authority was justified in levying penalty to that extent of turnover. However, for purpose of refixation of penalty, the assessing authority is directed to levy penalty, on the actually suppressed turnover of Rs. 1,09,956. For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; and (iii) any turnover on which tax is paid at the concessional rate subject to the condition of furnishing any declaration. Thus, the Tribunal directed the assessing authority to levy penalty on the actually suppressed turnover of Rs. 1,09,956 and deleted the penalty levied on the turnover estimated by the assessing authority on further additions. We find no reason to interfere with the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
