G SIVASUBRAMANIAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee is the petitioner herein. THE assessee is the proprietor of M/s. Balaji and Company, dealers in cane jaggery and palm jaggery, at Sattur. He filed a return for the assessment year 1984-85, disclosing total turnover of Rs. 7, 24, 611 and taxable turnover of Rs. 7, 21, 355 respectively. THE Deputy Commercial Tax Officer determined the total and taxable turnovers as Rs. 8, 29, 912 and Rs. 8, 26, 635 respectively, and while doing so levied penalty under section12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to the extent of Rs. 7, 298. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner granted a relief of tax of Rs. 400 for the turnover of Rs. 800 and reduced the penalty from Rs. 7, 298 to Rs. 4, 865. Aggrieved, the assessee filed a second appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, challenging the turnover for Rs. 97, 300 which is taxable at 5 per cent and the penalty of Rs. 4, 865 sustained by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

(2.) THE place of business was inspected on March 29, 1985, by the enforcing officers. A verification of the actual stock with the book stock, revealed a deficit of 25 kgs. of jaggery. THE officers secured a triplicate copy bought note numbered as 36 dated March 28, 1985. At the time of verification of accounts, the assessee submitted that he could not produce the original of the bought notes and the form XX delivery note accompanied the purchase. THE bought note No. 36 would reveal that jaggery was purchased for Rs. 2, 700. But the assessee could not produce bought note numbers 1 to 35. According to the assessee, these books were given for binding, and therefore he could not produce those books before the assessing authority. THE assessing authority completed the assessment on the basis of best judgment by multiplying the sum of Rs. 2, 700, as noted in the bough note No. 36, into 36 times which comes to Rs. 97, 200. THE price of 25 kgs. of cane jaggery as on March 29, 1985, was taken as Rs. 100. Thus, the disputed turnover comes to Rs. 97, 300. Treating the abovesaid amounts as suppressed turnover, the assessing officer levied a penalty of Rs. 7, 298 under section12(3) of the Act.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. A. K. Gopinath, learned Government Advocate, submitted that the assessee has already filed a return disclosing the turnover, in accordance with the account books maintained by him, that on inspection, it was found out that the assessee has suppressed certain sales, that the inspection revealed that the assessee had certain bills for purchasing jaggery outside the books of account, that the enforcing authorities have recovered a bought note No. 36 dated March 28, 1985, which would go to show that jaggery was purchased for a sum of Rs. 2, 700 and that since the assessee suppressed the purchase relating to 35 bills, the assessing officer estimated the suppressed turnover, by multiplying Rs. 2, 700 into 36 times to the tune of Rs. 97, 200. According to the learned Government Advocate, this method in the prevailing circumstances, is the best method to arrive at the suppressed turnover.