9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mrs.R.Hemalatha For the Respondents : Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader ORDER The petitioner has filed this writ petition against the impugned order dated 18.12.2006 passed by the 1st respondent/Appellate Tribunal in CTSA.No.55/02. 2. By the impugned order, the Appellate Tribunal has reversed the decision of the Additional Appellate Assistant Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sp; Turnover Tax Due Penalty Rs. Rs. Rs. Suppression in D7 Slips- 7,51,430 75,143 1,12,716 Section 7(A) - 3,26,709 13,068 19,603 3. The impugned order is assailed on the ground that the Tribunal ought not to have reversed the well considered order of the Appellate Commissioner dated 30.03.2001 in A.P.No.1212/2000. It is submitted that the petitioner has explained the list ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on the quotations, the department cannot conclude that there was sale suppression or purchase. 5. The impugned order is defended by the learned counsel for the Commercial Tax Department. It is submitted that the impugned order of the Tribunal is well considered and requires no interference. It is further submitted that the burden of proof is on the petitioner to discharge before the original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We are of the view that the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is well considered and requires no interference. This Court, in exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is only concerned with decision making process and not decision per se. The fact on record also indicates that the attempt of the petitioner to distance himself from the liability was made only befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
