No Records to Show Findings on Shortage of Chemical found during Survey: Allahabad HC Upholds the Regular Assessment Order [Read Order]

The Allahabad High Court upheld the regular assessment order which alleged the shortage of chemical though they are registered in the stock register as there was no record brought by the asseese to show that there was findings on the same in the provisional assessment.

Mr. Aloke Kumar appeared for the revisionist and Mr. B.K. Pandey, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the opposite party.

M/S National Chemical, the revisionist file the revision against the judgement and order passed by Commercial Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 47 of 2021 (A.Y. 2015-16).

It was submitted that the revisionist is a proprietorship firm involved in the manufacture and sale of chemicals. A survey was conducted at the business premises of the revisionist in which certain irregularities were found on the basis of which provisional assessment order was passed on 8.10.2015.

In the provisional assessment order, it has been averred that while issuing the provisional notice, the fact has wrongly been mentioned with regard to name of chemical and the said fact has been admitted by the assessing authority.

After that regular assessment order was passed on 2.3.2020 and second appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed as having become infructuous. Further submitted that in the regular assessment again proceedings have been initiated on the basis of survey dated 13.5.2015 in which it has been held that 1710 kgs. calcium octet was not found at the spot, though the same was mentioned in the stock register.

The opposite party has submitted that while framing the provisional assessment, the first appellate authority without any material on record and without any discussion, had accepted the version of the revisionist. He further submitted that once the final assessment order has been passed, the order of provisional assessment emerges in the regular assessment.

Further argued that neither any finding nor any decision was recorded while framing the provisional assessment with regard to shortage found of 1710 kg of chemical as mentioned in the stock register at the time of survey dated 13.5.2015, hat the first appellate authority has observed that at the time of survey dated 3.5.2015 stock of calcium octet was not found but same was available in the factory.

A single judge bench comprising Justice Piyush Agarwal observed that “the observation of the 1st appellate authority that the chemical was available in the factory is without any material on record or discussion has no leg to stand. Once neither any discussion nor any finding has been recorded by any of the authority about shortcomings of chemical found at the time of survey dated 13.5.2015, it will be incorrect on the part of the revisionist to argue and suggest that once on the provisional assessment order the finding has been recorded in favour of the revisionist, which was confirmed by the first appellate authority, the matter ought not to have remanded the matter for redetermination of the said fact.”

The Court viewed that the revisionist has failed to show any finding or detailed decision on merit, which was recorded by any of the competent authority in his favour to justify the shortage of chemical found at the time of survey dated 13.5.2015, though the same was mentioned in the stock register.

Since no interference is called , the Court dismissed the revision.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates