Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) The Applicant is a dealer of Bhang and the assessment year involved is 1984-85. The applicant carried on the business of Bhang, which is excisable commodity. The applicant has not maintained proper account books for the assessment year in question. The Sales lax Officer estimated the turn over of the dealer taking into account that the contract to sell Bhang was taken by the applicant on payment of Rs. 1,20,000/-. While the applicant has disclosed a turnover of Rs. 5455/- only. The assessing officer estimated the turnover of Bhang at Rs, 1,60,000/- by order dated 2nd September, 1988. This estimate of turnover has been confirmed by the first appellate authority as well as by the Tribunal.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(3.) Learned counsel for the dealer submitted that in view of the judgment of this court in the case of Subhash Chandra Bhang Dealer v. CST 1986, UPTC 354, the authorities below were not justified in fixing the turnover on the basis of contract money. In contra, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that the dealer/applicant has been carrying on the business of selling Bhang after obtaining Theka from the Excise Department for the last so many years. It is against the human conduct that inspite of suffering loss in the earlier years, where also the applicant disclosed paltry amount of turnover and was enhanced by the department would take theka year after year. Reliance has been placed on the following two judgments of this court (i) Bhagwan Swarup Bansal v. CST 1970 UPTC 375 and (ii) Dharm Devi Uma Shankar v. Commissioner of Sales Tax 1982 UPTC 43.;