9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . C. ORDER Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal , J. 1. Heard Sri Pradeep Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Sanjay Sareen, learned Standing Counsel for the state-opposite party. 2. By means of this instant revision, the revisionist has assailed the impugned judgment and order dated 13.12.2012 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Bench-I, Lucknow; whereby the Tribunal has dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order. Hence the present revision. 4. Counsel for the revisionist submits that the tribunal have erred while passing the impugned order as at the time of survey dated 23.12.2008, the books of accounts could not be adduced due to the fact that the books of accounts were maintained on computer i.e. soft copy. He next submits that after the end of the day, the bills were raised about all the sales. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order, has not been challenged in the present revision, hence the finding of facts against revisionist become final. He further submits that at the time of survey, the Invoice No.322 dated 9.10.2008 was found both in original and photocopy. He further submits that the modus operandi adopted by the revisionist is that in the morning, invoices were being raised for the actual amount and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 14 loose papers got tallied only two papers, i.e. 13 & 14, an adverse inference was drawn against the revisionist granting partial relief, against which second appeal was filed by both the revisionist as well as by the respondent. Further, an adverse inference has been drawn against the revisionist with regard to Parcha Nos. 13 & 14 as well as variation of stocks, which could not properly been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
