IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2006 / 30TH SRAVANA 1928 TRC.No. 14 of 2002() -------------------- TA.90/1997 of AGRL.I.T. ADDL.BENCH,PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ASSESSEE ---------------------------------- MODERN WOOD INDUSTRIES, NATTUKAL, THACHANATTUKARA. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.BALAGANGADHARAN SRI.S.SOMAN SMT.USHA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: REVENUE -------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.V. ASOKAN. THIS TAX REVISION CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. 326/2002 IN T.R.C. 14 OF 2002. DISMISSED. 21.8.2006. SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,JUDGE SD/- K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & K.M.JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tax Revn. Case No. 14 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of August, 2006. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Special Government Pleader. 2. The question raised is with regard to reasonableness of estimation of turnover at one time the running stock as against turn over of Rs.56,775/-. The assessing officer determined the turnover at double the running stock, which was Rs.9,23,930/-. The first appellate authority reduced the addition to one time running stock, that is Rs.4,60,965.75. The Tribunal confirmed this. 3. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the business was commenced in January, 1994 and the assessment pertains to the immediately succeeding year. According to him business was started with a good stock and assessment based on running stock is unreasonable. It is quite natural that a dealer commencing business may have a good stock to begin with to impress the customers and to TRC 14/2002. 2 provide choice. Even though there is nothing wrong in estimating turnover based on running stock, we find in this case the difference noticed on inspection was worth Rs.10,000/-. Of course there is some difference between the accounts and the turnover declared in the returns. Considering all this, we feel that the estimation of turnover at Rs.4,60,965.75, confirmed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Therefore we modify the order of the Tribunal by re-fixing taxable turnover on sales at Rs.Three Lakhs as against one time running stock fixed by the first appellate authority and confirmed by the Tribunal. Tribunal's decision on all other matters will stand. TRC is allowed to the extent indicated above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.M.JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TAX REVISION CASE No. 14 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 21.8.2006.