STATE OF TAMILNADU Vs. P ELAYAPERUMAL PUDUKOTTAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the revision filed at the instance of the revenue against a common order of the Tribunal in as many as 27 appeals dated 25.02.2002, wherein and whereby the revisional order passed by the Assessing Authority by bringing a huge turnover to tax and the consequential levy of penalty which has been confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been set aside. The correctness of the same is canvassed in this revision by formulating the following questions of law:-

(2.) WHETHER the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the view that the burden of proving the purchases of groundnut from Karnataka Dealers would still lie upon the department and not upon the assessee?

(3.) AS a matter of fact, the Tribunal has verified one such mediator's invoice and ultimately found that when the purchases were effected from the Marketing Committee, the invoice raised by the Marketing Committee were not made available. Based on the Commission Agent's account, an assessment cannot be framed against third parties in the absence of any materials without bringing the Commission Agent for cross-examination by the dealer. It is also further recorded that even after the remand order of the Special Tribunal, no further evidence was produced except the extract as nothing more than that was available with the department and recorded an unassailable finding that the ASsessing Officer was not equipped with any material to prove his claim that the dealers have purchased groundnuts from Karnataka dealers and not accounted them.