Pandian Timber Depot vs State of Tamil Nadu

We do not think that there is any substantial question of law arising in this case. There was a surprise inspection of the assessee''s place of

business and at that time it was found that there was a stock difference. In addition, certain slips were recovered and at least some of them

represented sales turnover which have been suppressed. On the basis of the slips and the stock variation, the assessing authority made a best

judgment assessment making certain additions to the admitted turnover in its assessment. The said assessment was challenged before the appellate

authority. The assessing authority had also levied penalty u/s 12(3) . The appellate authority, however, restricted the addition to the actual

suppression, that is Rs. 13,858.47. There was an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal also upheld the additions

sustained by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

Two points are canvassed by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner before us. One is that the stock variation has been duly explained by

the assessee and the authorities below have erred in rejecting the assessee''s explanation. As regards the slips which formed the basis of the

addition to the reported turnover, the contention of the assessee is that the slips did not represent the actual sale transactions, but they represent the

estimates give by the assessee to the purchasers which did not in fact materialise into actual sales. However, the authorities below, including the

Appellate Tribunal which is a final fact-finding authority, have rejected the assessee''s explanation and held that there was justification for making an

addition on the ground of the stock difference as also on the turnover represented by the slips Nos. 8 and 16. We do not think any interference is

called for. The decision of the Tribunal is based purely on facts. The revision is therefore dismissed.