JYOTHI JEWELLERY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BECAUSE the assessee as well as the State Revenue separately approached the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Beach, Palakkad, two separate revision cases are required to be filed by the assessee. Although with regard to the assessment year 1987-88, the proceedings relate to the assessment of the same partner-firm, in the name and style of Jyothi Jewellery, Market Road, filling two revision cases is to met the technical requirements but for all practical purposes it is one proceeding and is being decided by this judgment.

(2.) THE assessing, Messrs. Jyothi Jewellery, Market Road, Palakkad, is a partnership-firm dealing in purchase of old jewellery, melting and purification and in addition manufacture of new ornaments and sale thereof. THE three brothers, K. V. Ramachandran, K. V. Damodaran and K. V. Bhaskaran are the partners. THE assessment year was the year when the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 was in force. Taxable turnover of Rs. 5,89,155 was declared by the assessee for the assessment year in question. THE Sales Tax Officer, Palakkad, issued notice for production of accounts and it was during this time that firstly on July 6, 1987 the Special Customs, Preventive Road Checking Party, Palakkad, in the process of enquiry questioned one P. V. Usman of Tellicherry from the Palakkad Junction, Railway station area when currency notes to the value of Rs. 4,99,990 came to be seized. He was interrogated and it was revealed therein that they were the sale proceeds of gold which he has sold to one K. V. Bhaskaran, partner of the assessee-firm. It was in pursuance of this interrogation that the residence was searched along with the shop which was inspected. In the shop there was shortage of 4,389. 850 gms. of jewellery. In the search of the residence of the partner Shri K. V. Bhaskaran gold jewellery, primary gold and gold coins in all weighing 8,735 gms. came to be seized and in regard to the said seizure adjudication proceedings were taken up before the Collector of Customs, Cochin. THE said adjudication resulted in the adjudication order dated June 13, 1988.

(3.) THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Palakkad, was the first appellate authority. Rejection of accounts as well as compounding of offence which were the basis for resort to the best judgment were upheld by the first appellate authority by the order dated December 19, 1989. However what the first appellate authority did was to reduce the turnover to four times the average running stock. Thus, according to the order of the first appellate authority the turnover estimated on the basis of multiplication by 4 was estimated to be Rs. 46,35,520. Accordingly the balance of tax and surcharge payable also as altered and was reduced to Rs. 2,02,643 and Rs. 14,425, totalling to Rs. 2,17,068. We find from the petition of the tax revision that out of this amount of Rs. 2,17,068 during the pendency of the said appeal proceedings itself the assessee paid Rs. 1,06,438 leaving the balance of Rs. 1,10,630.