K FAROOK MOHAMMED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TAX Case Appeals filed under Section 37 of the TNGST Act to set aside the orders passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT) Suo Moto Revision in T1/10433/95 (SMR Nos.152 and 151 of 1997) dated 26.09.1997.) The assessee has preferred these appeals as against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT) Suo Moto Revision in T1/10433/95 (SMR Nos.152 and 151 of 1997) dated 26.09.1997 for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87.

(2.) THE assessee is a contractor and he has reported a total turn over for the year 1985-86 and 1986-87. Based on the records produced, the Assessing Officer had levied tax taking into account the railway contract for supply and doing contract work in respect of removal and filling of the ballasts (jelly) and in view of the fact the assessee had not chosen to disclose the contract entered into the railways for the supply and working of the ballasts in the railway line, a penalty was also imposed at 1-1/2 times the tax of the undisclosed sales under Section 12(3) of the TNGST Act. Aggrieved against such assessment, the assesee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assessment Commissioner in both the cases.

(3.) THE only contention raised by him was when a Governmental Organisation, namely Railway would categorically indicate by virtue of this letter that there was no supply involved and what was the work awarded was only the labour contract, the finding of the suo moto enquiry is legally sustainable.