TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 7A of the TNGST Act. The Tribunal noted that there was no proof by way of delivery note for the supply of raw materials for manufacture of finished goods for labour charges. Further, it noted that there was no proof for the supply of finished goods to the customers with the labour bills raised by the petitioner in the name of the customers whereas, there was receipt of raw materials by the petitioner in the name of some other party. The extract of the bank account showed that a sum of ₹ 9,07,529/- was credited for the year 1997- 98 and though the petitioner contended that the amount related to labour charges, no proof was produced by the petitioner and in the absence of evidence to prove that the receipt of money was for labo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the place of business of the petitioner was inspected by the Enforcement Wing Officials on 16.03.1998 and they recovered certain records based on which, a D7 proposal was drawn. Based on the report of the Enforcement Wing, the Assessing Officer called upon the petitioner to produce the accounts by issuing summons. Based on the statement recorded by the Enforcement Wing, the matter was referred to the Assessing Officer, who took up the assessment proceedings. 3.On a reading of the assessment order dated 15.03.1999, it is seen that the petitioner did not cooperate in the proceedings. The Assessing Officer, after elaborately considering the entire issue and taking note of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the factual findings and has clearly brought out the modus operandi of the petitioner and the facts clearly show that there was sales suppression done by the petitioner and the Assessing Officer was correct in estimating the turnover and assessing the petitioner and this order was erroneously reversed by the first appellate authority and the Tribunal rightly interfered with the order of the first appellate authority and restored the assessment. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate submitted that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal may be affirmed. 7.We have heard Mr.K.Soundararajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Swarnavel, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and perused the mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al goods. At the time of inspection, 150kgs of plastic granules was unloaded in the factory and the name of the consignee was Beekay Plastics, Chennai and the Assessing Authority estimated the sale value of electrical goods at ₹ 9,720/- at 16% and assessed the purchase value at ₹ 7,200/- at 4% under Section 7A of the Act. 11.Before the Tribunal, the petitioner contended that the goods on both the occasions were sent for manufacture of finished goods for labour work and the statement, which was obtained by coercion, cannot be relied upon. The Tribunal found that the petitioner had paid wages during the relevant year to the tune of ₹ 4,12,515/- as per book marked B and based upon the payment of wages, the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the estimation of turnover based on D7 records recovered from the petitioner, will not come under the category of Explanations (i) and (ii) of Section 12(3) of the TNGST Act so as to exclude the turnover from the levy of penalty. Accordingly, levy of penalty was sustained and the appeal filed by the State was allowed. 13.So far as the assessment is concerned, we find that the Tribunal has examined the facts in its entirety and concluded against the petitioner. We find that the approach of the Tribunal is not perverse for us to interfere by exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, to the said extent, the order passed by the Tribunal, confirming the assessment made on the petitioner, has to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
