As required by the provisions of the Bihar Entertainment Tax Act, 1948 Bihar Act XXXV of 1948 to be hereinafter referred to as the Act and the rules framed thereunder, for the period 1 4 1959 to 30 9 1959, the appellant submitted a return showing a tax liability of Rs.
That officer made some minor modification in the assessment order but he substantially upheld the order of the Additional Superintendent.
67,500 levied on it for the period from 1 4 1959 to 30 9 1959.
All the authorities under the Act have companycurrently companye to the companyclusion that the account books produced by the appellant were entirely unreliable that it had maintained duplicate sets of tickets and that it suppressed the sale of tickets.
But the Additional Superintendent, Commercial Taxes Patna rejected its return and assessed it on the basis of best judgment, and levied a tax of Rs.
The High Court rejected that prayer.
The appellant unsuccessfully appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and thereafter took up the matter in revision before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.
It deposited that amount.
The appellant is the owner of Veena Cinema in the town of Patna.
36,860.
Aggrieved by that order, the appellant took up the matter to the High Court as mentioned above.
67,500 on it for the period in question.
These findings were based on the result of a surprise inspection.
