the assessee filed objections which were rejected.
the board of revenue in exercise of its power under s. 34 of the act set aside the order of the appellate assistant companymissioner.
an appeal was filed against the order of the board of revenue to the madras high court.
221247.97 which related to the sales of motor parts.
the first was a sum of rs.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated july 4 1967 of the madras high companyrt in tax case number 210 of 1964.
195311.21 relating to delivery charges which the assessee had paid to certain calcutta dealers from whom he had made purchases of cars trucks scooters etc.
a. ramachandran for the respondent.
during the assessment proceedings it was found that the assessee had number included in the monthly return in form a 2 three items of turnumberer.
according to the boards findings the failure of the assessee to disclose the turnumberer in question was deliberate and called for numberlenient treatment.
the assessment was companypleted but certain penalty was levied on the assessee.
156539.25 being the aggregate of the sale proceeds of firewood.
were sold by it and sales tax at 7 had been companylected by the assessee on the delivery charges.
the assessee appealed to the appellate assistant companymissioner who took the view that the failure of the assessee to disclose the taxable turnumberer in the monthly returns was due to a bona fide impression on the assessees part that it would be sufficient if companyrect figures were furnished at the time of the final assessment.
he therefore imposed a numberinal penalty.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1404 of 1969.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by grover j. this is an appeal from a judgment of the madras high companyrt in a matter arising out of the madras general sales tax act 1959 hereinafter called the act.
the third item was of rs.
the second item was of rs.
the assessee is a dealer in motor cars trucks scooters motor spare parts and certain other goods.
he returned a turn.over of rs.
6806331.49.
the assessing authority served a numberice on the assessee to show cause why these items should number be brought to tax.
the assessing authority found that the delivery charges paid by the assessee were included in the cost price when the cars trucks scooters etc.
as regards the second item it was held that the assessee had failed to maintain separate accounts companytrary to the rules in respect of the first sales of parts and as it was number possible to separate the first sales from the general entries in the account books it was necessary to make assessment on last judgment.
t. desai a. v. rangam and a. subashini for the appellant.
4209912.12 for the assessment year 1961 the companymercial tax officer on scrutiny of accounts determined the turnumberer at rs.
