Skip to content


Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bhola Pd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case Number S.T.R. Nos. 73 and 74 of 1981
Judge
Reported in[1982]50STC371(All)
AppellantCommissioner of Sales Tax
RespondentBhola Pd.
DispositionPetition allowed
Excerpt:
- - its account book was rejected and the turnover was determined to the best of judgment on past history. consequently past history was considered to be the best guide for determining turnover particularly when there was no survey or any other material available on record. 2. once the account book was rejected the assessing authority had jurisdiction to determine turnover to the best of judgment......by it. its account book was rejected and the turnover was determined to the best of judgment on past history. the claim of the assessee was that its business was of crushing oil-seeds and grinding flour on labour basis. the assessing and the appellate authorities did not believe it because the amount of oil-seeds and flour crushed in the year in dispute, as compared to electricity consumed, was not correct. consequently past history was considered to be the best guide for determining turnover particularly when there was no survey or any other material available on record. this finding was not set aside by the revising authority, yet revision was allowed because the assessee was held non-taxable in subsequent years.2. once the account book was rejected the assessing authority had.....
Judgment:

R.M. Sahai, J.

1. These are two revisions directed against common order passed by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. The assessee carried on business in sale of aluminium utensils, oil, etc. Apart from this he also manufactured oil from oil-seeds purchased by it. Its account book was rejected and the turnover was determined to the best of judgment on past history. The claim of the assessee was that its business was of crushing oil-seeds and grinding flour on labour basis. The assessing and the appellate authorities did not believe it because the amount of oil-seeds and flour crushed in the year in dispute, as compared to electricity consumed, was not correct. Consequently past history was considered to be the best guide for determining turnover particularly when there was no survey or any other material available on record. This finding was not set aside by the revising authority, yet revision was allowed because the assessee was held non-taxable in subsequent years.

2. Once the account book was rejected the assessing authority had jurisdiction to determine turnover to the best of judgment. What method should have been adopted by him has been laid down by numerous decisions of this Court. Past history has always been considered to be relevant consideration. The assessing and the appellate authorities therefore in basing their decisions on the past history did not commit any error of law. What happened in earlier years could have been a guide for the year in dispute but non-taxability of the assessee in subsequent years could not reflect back. The revising authority was not justified in declaring the assessee non-taxable only because in subsequent years it was found that its turnover was below taxable limit.

3. In the circumstances, both the revisions succeed and are allowed. The order passed by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, is set aside. The Tribunal shall determine the turnover afresh in accordance with law. The Commissioner of Sales Tax is entitled to costs which is assessed at Rs. 50 one set.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //