C P ABOOTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode in T.A. No. 414 of 2002 and Cross Objection No. 37 of 2003 dated 23rd March, 2004. The Tribunal, while partly allowing the Revenue's appeal, has modified the additions made by the assessing authority. The assessing authority in his order had made the addition of the actual suppression and further addition equal to two times thereof for the probable omission and suppression to the conceded taxable turnover while passing the best judgment assessment order. The facts are : the assessment year in question is 1999 -2000. After rejecting the books of account and the returns filed by the assessee, the assessing authority, based on the check -post declarations, had made certain additions to the conceded taxable turnover of the dealer and accordingly has quantified the tax liability under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.

(2.) THE aforesaid order of the assessing authority had been questioned by the assessee before the first appellate authority, who, in turn, had modified the orders passed by the assessing authority and had directed the assessing authority to accept a lump -sum of rupees two lakhs towards the probable omission and suppression to the conceded turnover made by the assessee for the assessment year in question. The aforesaid order of the first appellate authority was further modified by the Appellate Tribunal. In that, the Tribunal has stated as under : "As regards the estimation, considering the nature and volume of business run by the dealer and the nature and volume of purchase suppression referred to above, we find that, the first appellate authority is not justified in reducing the addition to a lump sum amount of rupees two lakhs. However, taking into consideration of the fact that here apart from discrepancy referred to above, there are no other discrepancies, we find that, the addition of two times of the suppressed turnover is a bit excessive. Considering all the aspects of the matter, we find that, it is only just and reasonable to reduce the further addition equal to the suppressed turnover (including gross profit), i.e., actual + equal. Hence, we hereby quash the order of the first appellate authority and direct the assessing authority to modify the assessment accordingly. So, this appeal has to be allowed in part. Cross objections fails." The basis for the best judgment assessment is check -post declarations. In view of the declaration of law made by the Full Bench of this court, in our opinion, the Tribunal is justified in directing the assessing authority to make an addition equal to the suppressed turnover (including gross profit), i.e., actual + equal towards the probable omission and suppression in the taxable turnover of the dealer for the assessment year in question. This is a finding of fact and the quantification of tax is made on the estimation basis by the Tribunal.