VIJAYALAKSHMI AND CO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three tax revision cases preferred by the assessee are connected and can be disposed of together. T. R. C. No. 343 of 1985 relates to the assessment year 1973-74 and is preferred against the order in T. A. No. 431 of 1981 on the file of Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The said appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Appeals), Guntur, in Appeal No. 117/80-81 dated April 24, 1981, which in its turn confirmed the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, Tanuku, in Assessment No. 3623/73-74 dated March 15, 1979. The order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer was indeed an order of reassessment made subsequent to a search and seizure operation. The earlier assessment dated December 20, 1977, for 1973-74 was set aside and the reassessment made. The Tribunal, while disposing of T. A. No. 431 of 1981, partly allowed the assessee's appeal in relation to a turnover of Rs. 29,109. 70 but dismissed the appeal in respect of the remaining turnover included by the assessing authority in the reassessment order. T. R. C. No. 20 of 1985 is directed against the order of the Tribunal in T. A. No. 433 of 1981, relating to assessment year 1975-76. The said appeal was preferred by the assessee against the order of the Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Appeals), Guntur, in Appeal No. 130/80-81 dated April 24, 1981, confirming the assessment made by the Commercial Tax Officer, Tanuku, in Assessment No. 3623/75-76 dated November 30, 1979. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee. T. R. C. No. 8 of 1985 has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Tribunal in T. A. No. 432 of 1981, relating to assessment year 1973-74. The appeal to the Tribunal was preferred against the order of the Assistant Commissioner (CT) (Appeals), Guntur, in Appeal No. 119/80-81 dated April 24, 1981, reducing the penalty from Rs. 32,485 to Rs. 12,994, and thus modifying the order of the Commercial Tax Officer, Tanuku, in P. R. No. 7/78-79 dated April 10, 1979, in respect of the assessment year 1973-74. The Tribunal in its order under revision reduced the penalty from Rs. 12,994 to Rs. 4,970. We shall take up these matters seriatim. T. R. C. No. 343 of 1985 :

(2.) THIS revision arises out of reassessment proceedings for the year 1973-74. The assessee is a dealer in fertilisers, jaggery and hydros with its head office at Aravalli and branch at Tadepalligudem. In respect of the assessment year 1973-74, the assessment was originally completed on December 20, 1977. Later, certain incriminating material was brought to light as a result of search conducted by the Income-tax Department at the business premises of the assessee. Apart from this, certain other incriminating material was furnished by one Sri Satti Suri Reddy of Manchili by letter dated August 10, 1976, addressed to the commercial tax department. On the basis of the above material, the Commercial Tax Officer added a further turnover of Rs. 1,24,428 by his order dated March 15, 1979 and assessed the assessee to additional tax. (He also levied a penalty for the year 1973-74 out of which the connected T. R. C. No. 8 of 1985 arises ). Against the order of reassessment, the assessee preferred an Appeal No. 117/80-81 which was dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner on April 24, 1981. On further appeal to the Tribunal, it reduced the assessable turnover to an extent of Rs. 29,109. 70 and confirmed the addition of the rest of the turnover. It is against this order of the Tribunal that this revision is preferred.

(3.) ON the other hand, Sri A. Venkata Ramana, the learned counsel for the department, has contended that the findings of the Tribunal are the findings of fact and there is no error of law. He further submitted that the findings are supported by positive evidence as well as considerable circumstantial evidence and there are no grounds made out for interference in this revision. We are of the view that the finding of the Tribunal relating to the addition of the turnover of Rs. 52,906. 92 is based on ample evidence and that the finding is one of fact and cannot be interfered with in this revision. The Tribunal noticed that the transactions disclosed in the patties amounting to Rs. 52,906. 92 related to 63 ryots on whose behalf the assessee-firm was trading as an agent, in respect of jaggery. The pieces of circumstantial evidence on which the Tribunal relied for this purpose are that the patties are on the letterheads of the assessee and that they also contain the signature of the assessee's representative, and the further circumstance that some of the patties seized were genuine patties which have been reflected in the accounts of the assessee. The other circumstances on which the Tribunal relied was that the signature in these patties and the genuine patties tallied. The Tribunal also noticed that in the account books of the assessee some of the names mentioned in the unaccounted patties are identified as principals. From all these circumstances, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the patties amounting to Rs. 52,906. 92 were suppressed and that the turnover in that behalf had to be added. In other words, the Tribunal found a clear nexus between the patties unaccounted for and the accounts of the firm. The said finding is a finding of fact which cannot be interfered with. We are of the view that having regard to the above circumstances relied upon by the Tribunal, there is no need for it to remand the matter to the lower authorities.