IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 ST.Rev..No. 333 of 2008() ------------------------- TA.22/2008 of S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDL.BENCH,PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER: -------------------- RUBY SURESH, SUPREME FIBRE TECH, PALLAVUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFFIQ THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... S.T. Rev. No.333 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 16th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for revision petitioner and Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. Challenge is against addition sustained by the Tribunal on account of variation of stock noticed during inspection. Even though counsel for the petitioner contended that stock variation noticed is very insignificant and the addition sustained is disproportionate to the minor irregularity, we do not find any ground to interfere because addition under this count is only Rs.1 lakh. The petitioner admitted the offence by remitting compounding fee and therefore, no modification is called for on this account. So far as the addition on account of undervaluation is concerned, we do not find any substance in the contention because stock inventory value was much higher than the sale price disclosed which obviously means underpricing of the goods in the invoices. In the circumstances, no interference is called for on the addition sustained by the Tribunal on 2 this count also. However, we find force in the contention of the assessee that deduction should have been granted for the materials used in the construction of the house of the petitioner. Even though Government Pleader pointed out that raw materials have been purchased by availing concessional rate and the same could not have been used for own purpose, we feel a reduced amount on estimation basis can be granted to meet the ends of justice. Consequently we fix the value of the goods attributable to the construction of house of the petitioner at Rs.1 lakh and direct the Assessing Officer to reduce the turnover of Rs.1 lakh from the taxable turnover fixed in assessment and grant consequential benefit. The S.T. Revision case is allowed to the above extent. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge V.K.MOHANAN Judge pms