SHYAM BHANDAR Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under Section 33(2) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). The question referred to us is stated below : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the enhancement of the gross turnover by Rs. 1,50,000 was arbitrary, perverse and without material ?

(2.) The sales tax authorities added Rs. 1,50,000 to the gross turnover returned by the assessee. The facts are that the business premises of the assessee was inspected by Shri H. P. Varma, Assistant Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, on 7th August, 1968, to examine the books of accounts of the assessee. In the course of inspection, he found a chit on which was mentioned two bags of maize and one bag of gram. There was no cash memo issued in regard to the sale of these grains. The Assistant Superintendent asked the assessee about it. The assessee explained that no cash memo had been issued till then as the sale had not been completed, although the goods had been weighed. According to the assessee's representative, the chit or purza only contained reference of the weighment of the grains. The Assistant Superintendent did not doubt the statement of the assessee. His inspection report is annexure 1/a to the statement of the case. It would be relevant to quote some portions of the report which reads as follows : Also seen and signed one loose sheet of paper containing sale of two bags of makai and one bag of gram (chana) in the name of M/s. Jagarnath Shyam Sunder of Chanan. The dealer stated that dealer of Chanan had come to make purchase and truck No. BRJ 834 standing in front of the gaddi was to carry the goods to Chanan. Purchases had not been finalised and hence cash memo was not issued.

(3.) In course of assessment proceeding the Sales Tax Officer considered the purza. In his view the purza showed that the assessee had indulged in clandestine business in regard to the bags of maize and gram. On that score as well as for some other reasons he enhanced the gross turnover by rupees two lacs. The assessee being aggrieved by the order of the assessment, appealed to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The appellate authority also did not accept the stand of the assessee but reduced the enhancement by Rs. 50,000. The enhancement thus remained at Rs. 1,50,000. The assessee being aggrieved by the rejection of his stand and enhancement of the gross turnover claimed reference to this Court under Section 33(1) of the Act but that also was rejected. The assessee then moved this Court for calling for a reference. The High Court called for the reference of the question referred to above. Hence the question referred to us for our opinion.