GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 5 - ORISSA HIGH COURT

2016 (4) TMI 5 - ORISSA HIGH COURT - [2015] 85 VST 342 (Ori) - Enhancement of turnover to 40 times - Suppression of gross turnover - Dealer in grocery articles - Stock of materials goods with reference to the books of accounts not found in order - Held that:- the enhancement of the figure by the Tribunal on the conclusion of facts for which refrained from reference on question of law. There is no discussion of any fact showing nexus of enhancement of 40 times to the facts of the case. Had there .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cided the case arbitrarily against the petitioner. So the conclusion arrived at by the learned Tribunal about suppression of the turnover and multiplying it 40 times is based on no factual aspects. Hence the order of the Tribunal is vulnerable, illegal and perverse. - Petition disposed of - STREV No. 112 of 2009 - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - Indrajit Mahanty and Dr. D. P. Choudhury, JJ. For the Petitioner : M/s. Subash Ch. Lal, Sumit Lal and Sujit Lal JUDGMENT In the captioned revision the petitioner as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

learned assessing authority got the establishment of the petitioner assessed for the year 1995-96. The I. S. T. (Intelligence Wing) of Sambalpur made visit to the establishment of the petitioner and found the stock of the materials goods with reference to the books of accounts of the dealer were not in order. Similarly another visit was made by the Intelligence Sales Tax Circle on September 13, 1995 and found 40 quintals of rice was carried from Gosala by the petitioner without any document. As .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aid by the petitioner under rule 36 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules. The petitioner challenged the order of the learned assessing authority before the first appellate authority. The learned first appellate authority observed that the calculation of the assessing authority about suppression of the amount for 26 times is excessive and contrary to the decision of the court. When he found that the enhancement of turnover by 26 times of alleged suppression of ₹ 47,805 is excessive, he limited the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellate authority. Both the appeals were heard together and learned Tribunal passed a common order. After discussion at length learned Tribunal found suppression of turnover. It observed that the learned assessing authority estimated suppression for the whole year at 26 times of the occasional suppression, whereas the first appellate authority reduced the demands to 16 times. It further stated that the suppression having been estimated on two occasions the suppression per occasion for ₹ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nal is perverse, illegal and absolute non-application of mind. According to him, without any basis the learned Tribunal has computed suppression 40 times when learned assessing authority computed the suppression 26 times and the first appellate authority computed the same to 16 times. The case of the petitioner should have been accepted as it is a grocery shop and during the visit, the concerned officers have not checked up the grocery items properly about its variety and quantity. He further st .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ut it has no basis to relax the number of times of suppression as determined by the assessing authority. He further submitted that the order of the learned Tribunal is justified for enhancing the suppression by 40 times, since many items of the grocery shop have not been taken into consideration, where the tax must have been suppressed by the petitioner. Be that as it may, learned standing counsel for the Revenue supports the order of the Tribunal and submitted to dismiss the revision. We have h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed it to 16 times. Learned Tribunal while enhancing the suppression of the turnover to 40 times has observed in the following manner: ". . . The dates of inspection of two different inspecting agencies were April 25, 1995 and August 2, 1995 and on both the occasions suppressions were unearthed. From this it is implied that the suppressions have a pattern. The learned STO estimated the suppression for the whole year at 26 times of the occasional suppression whereas the learned ACST reduced t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng the case of Ranital Rice Mill [1994] 93 STC 362 (Orissa) it has increased the suppression by 40 times. There is no any reason assigned in the order except applying the ratio of such decision. In the case of State of Orissa v. Ranital Rice Mill [1994] 93 STC 362 (Orissa). Their Lordships have been pleased to observe at page 364 as follows: ". . . Though the Tribunal has not indicated the nexus in so many words yet it cannot be said that the Tribunal did not consider relevant aspects while .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version