SIMA METAL SYNDICATE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice. At our instance, the formal service of notice is waived by Mr. Jaymin Gandhi, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on behalf of the respondent-State. At the threshold both the sides have been heard finally and with consent of the parties, the matter is being disposed of finally. This group of three appeals preferred by the appellant-assessee for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 under section 78 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") since contains identical questions on facts and in law, they are being decided by way of this common order.

(2.) The appellant is the sole proprietary firm, engaged in the business of selling and reselling of all kinds of ferrous and non-ferrous metal scrap in and outside the State of Gujarat. It is also registered as a dealer under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 and under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

(3.) We have heard extensively Ms. Gargie Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of M/s. Wadia Ghandy & Co. for the appellant-assessee, who vehemently and tenaciously made her submissions. It is urged by her that the first appellate authority has acted contrary to law by adding 100 per cent to the turnover without any basis by applying the best judgment concept when there is nothing on record as to how much of turnover was suppressed. It was incumbent upon the Department to verify and crosscheck the transactions to prove that the inter-State sale transactions indeed had taken place. She further urged that the Tribunal erred on facts and in law while confirming such order of the first appellate authority and therefore, there is perversity in such order and, therefore, the court needs to interfere. She further urged that unless the authority is directed to bring such proof on the record, it would be open for the authority to add any amount to the total turnover without substantiating the same with legally admissible proof.