BAYYA PITCHAIAH Vs. STATE OF A. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has been referred to a Full Bench by Basi Reddy, J., and one of us (Sambasiva Rao, J.) on the ground that the view of the Division Bench in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Varre Pothuraju, (1963) 2 Andh LT 201 : (1964) 15 STC 222 as to the scope and meaning of Section 14 (4) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, vis-a- vis the revisional jurisdiction under Section 20 of the said Act has cut down the amplitude of the powers of the revisional authority, although there are no restrictive words in Section 20 of that Act, and that the decision therefore, requires re-consideration.

(2.) The facts relevant for a determination of the question referred to us are as follows:- The petitioner is an individual carrying on business in butter and ghee, and registered as a dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act (No. 8 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). For the assessment year 1956-57, he reported a gross turnover of Rs. 1,58,514-7-9 and a net turnover of Rs. 35,824-13-6, claiming exemption on a turnover of Rs. 1,22,689-13-0. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Gudivada, who was the assessing authority, checked the accounts for that year and found that the gross turnover was Rs. 1,58,524-12-0, and after allowing the exemptions to which he was entitled the taxable turnover as per his accounts was found to be Rs. 85,984-14-9. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer inspected the petitioner's shop on 17-5-1956, and found that certain bills were not issued for cash and credit sales till the time of his inspection. He made a second inspection on 9-10-1956, and recovered some slips of paper. By his order dated 27-3-1958, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer held that Rs. 1,500 had to be added to the turnover of October, 1956, for not accounting for the advances and other defects and Rs. 2,000 had to be added towards the estimated suppressions, but determined the net turnover of the dealer for 1956-57 at Rs. 37,984-14-9, and assessed him to tax on the same. The Commercial Tax Officer, Masulipatnam, examined the accounts on 19-5-1959, and found that in fact Rs. 1,500 was not added to the turnover for the month of October, 1956, on account of suppressions. He also found that as per the slips of paper and the Anamath Book recovered by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer on 9-10-1956, the sales amounted to Rupees 1,574-5-6 during the period 1-10-1956 to 9-10-56, while the cash and credit sales shown in the regular accounts amounted only to Rs. 579-0-3, and that during that period the proportion between the turnover in the regular accounts and the turnover suppressed was 1:3. For these reasons, he was of the opinion that the assessment made by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer required revision, and issued notice of the proposed assessment. He declined to accept the explanation on behalf of the dealer, and assessed him to tax on a further turnover of Rs. 71970.

(3.) Against the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, an appeal was preferred to the Assistant Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Guntur, who, by his order dated 28-3-62 refused to interfere and dismissed the appeal. Against that decision, an appeal was preferred to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad, in T. A. No. 473 of 1962, and the Tribunal by its order dated 3rd March 1964 dismissed the appeal, and upheld the order of the Commercial Tax Officer. Against the order of the Tribunal the Revision petition has been preferred under Section 22 (1) of the Act.