1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.05.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN T.C.(R).No.309 of 2011 The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Madurai Division, Madurai. ... Petitioner -vs- Tvl.Prince, 156/4, Nethaji Road, Madurai. ... Respondent Tax Case Revision petition is presented under Section 38(1) of the TNGST Act, 1959 (Rules 36 of the TNGST Rules, 1959) to revise the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (AB), Madurai dated 29/01/2004 in Madurai Tribunal Appeal No.79/2002 against the Order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner(CT), Madurai(North) in 314/2000 dated 27.11.2001 against the Order of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Nethaji Road Circle, Madurai in TNGST No.4980368/95-96 dated 22.03.2000. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : No appearance O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.] Heard Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the petitioner. 2.This Revision by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (AB), Madurai in Madurai Tribunal Appeal No.79/2002 dated 29.01.2004. The said appeal was filed by the respondent/dealer against the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Madurai dated 27.11.2011 relating to the assessment year 1994-95. The respondent dealer disputed the assessment involving a tax effect of Rs.12,678/-, surcharge of Rs.1,902/- and penalty of Rs.12,454/-. The place of business of the respondent was inspected by the officers of the department on 03.11.1995 and during the course of such inspection, recovered two pocket note books and two slips containing business transaction. Based on the said records, the Assessing Officer arrived at the suppression at Rs.2,00,980/- to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 which equal time addition for probable omission was also made. Accordingly, total taxable turn over was redetermined and penalty was also imposed. Aggrieved by such order, the respondent dealer filed an Appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent filed the Appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3.The Appellate Tribunal examined the entire records, as to whether there could have been a revision of total and taxable turnover based on the slips and note books which were recovered during the course of inspection by the Enforcement Wing Officers and after making a thorough factual exercise, held that the actual sales suppression arrived at by the Assessing Officer is proper and based on materials, sustained the actual sales suppression involved on the basis of slips and notebooks. However, did not agree with the finding of the Assessing Officer that the same pattern of suppression has continued. Therefore, the equal time addition was held to be not proper and the same was deleted. Any how, a sum of Rs.10,000/- as adhoc addition was made on the dealer for improper maintenance of accounts. Penalty imposed under Section 16(2) of the TNGST Act, 1959 was not disbursed. Thus, we find the Appellate Tribunal after having done a thorough factual exercise and passed the order, we are not inclined to exercise revisional jurisdiction to examine the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal as if converting ourselves as a second appellate Court. For all the above reasons, this Revision is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(C) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1.The Additional Judicial Member, TamilNadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal ,(AB) Madurai. 2.The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Madurai Division, Madurai. 3.The Appellate Assistant Commisioner(CT) Madurai (North) , Madurai. 4.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - Nethaji Road Circle, Madurai. +1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR NO.55552 mj MAS/MR:23.05.2017:2P-6C T.C.(R).No.309 of 2011 03.05.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/