IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 18 of 2007 ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.06.06 IN TA.31/2005 OF THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL .BENCH,KOZHIKODE. .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE : -------------------------------------------------------------- N.C.NANU, PROPRIETOR, N.S.TRADE LINKS, THURAYUR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR SMT.PRIYA VIJAYAN RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT/REVENUE ---------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ST(RV).No. 18 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of November 2008 ORDER H.L.DATTU, C.J. The assessee is a dealer in biscuits. For the assessment year 1998-99, he had filed his annual returns conceding a total and taxable turnover of Rs.21,155/-. The said return had been accepted by the assessing authority. 2. After receipt of the information from the check post authorities, the assessing authority had issued notice under Section 19 of the KGST Act, inter alia bringing to the notice of the assessee that, there is escapement of tax due to the State and he intends to make use of information received from the check post authorities for the purpose of re-assessment. In spite of service of notice, the assessee did not file his objections. Therefore, the assessing authority has completed the re-assessment proceedings by its order dated 29.11.02 and and in that had quantified the tax liability of the assessee in a sum of Rs.4,15,671/-. The assessing authority has also imposed a penalty of Rs.1,18,356/- for non-accounting of the inter-State purchase in the books of accounts maintained for the assessment year in question. 3. Orders passed by the assessing authority under Section 19 of the ST(RV) No.18 OF 2007 -:2:- Act has been confirmed by the First Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal. 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Tribunal in TA No.31 of 2005 dated 15.06.06, the assessee has approached this Court by filing this Tax Revision Case. The assessee has raised the following questions of law: “i) Whether re-opening of the assessment under Section 19 of the KGST Act by the assessing authority without giving ample opportunity to the assessee to verify the purchase bills and check post declaration despite specific request can be justified ? ii) Whether re-opening of assessment as per order dated 29.11.02 in contravention to Section 30B(4) of KGST Act can be justified ? iii) Whether imposition of penalty under Section 15(5A) can be justified in the light of the decision in Varghese v. Sales Tax Officer reported in 2003(3) KLT 593 ? iv) Whether the Tribunal ought to have set aside the assessment and imposition of penalty made by the assessing authority ?” 5. Admittedly, the assessee had conceded a total and taxable turnover of Rs.21,155/- in the annual returns filed for the assessment year 1998-99. 6. After completion of the assessment proceedings, the assessing authority has received information from the check post authorities, wherein it was noticed that, the assessee has effected inter-State purchase to the tune of Rs.3,08,412.80. ST(RV) No.18 OF 2007 -:3:- 7. In view of this information, the assessing authority had re-opened the assessment by issuing notice under Section 19 of the Act. Notice was served on the assessee, but reasons known to him, he did not chose to file any reply. Therefore, the assessing authority had no other alternative, but to complete the re-assessment proceedings by confirming the proposals made by him in the re-assessment notice. 8. Before the Tribunal the one and only contention raised by the assessee was that, the assessing authority had not given sufficient opportunity of hearing before completing the re-assessment proceedings under Section 19 of the Act. While answering his contention, the Tribunal in its order has observed as under: “In such circumstances, we are of the view that the contention now raised by the appellant that ample opportunities were not given to him by the lower authorities to establish his contention about the genuineness of the inter-state transactions is without any basis.” 9. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion, that, the contention now raised by the petitioner that ample opportunity was not given to establish his contention about the genuineness of inter-State transaction is without any basis. 10. This finding of fact cannot be upset by us in a petition filed under Section 41 of the Act by the assessee. Moreover, the assessee has not chosen to file any objections to the re-assessment notice. Therefore, in these circumstances, ST(RV) No.18 OF 2007 -:4:- we cannot set aside the order of the Tribunal confirming the re-assessment order passed by the assessing authority under Section 19 of the Act. 11. In the above view of the matter, we do not find any good ground to interfere with the orders passed by the Tribunal in TA No.31 of 2005. Therefore, the revision requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE ttb/dk.