ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) For the assessment year 1994-95, an assessment order has been passed against the revisionist. He was running a brick-kiln and liability of tax has been assessed based upon manufacturing for a period of 91 days i.e. from 1st April, 1994 to 30th June, 1994. The defence of the assessee that he had operated brick-kiln only for a period of 11 days was disbelieved. The assessing authority computed production of 10 lac bricks, which have been partially reduced by the tribunal. The proceedings for assessment were essentially based upon a survey conducted on 8th November, 1994, wherein it was found that the brick-kiln operations had already been closed. However, certain stock of bricks were found available, and on such basis, the proceedings have been undertaken. The authorities have further observed that at the time of inspection no documents and records were produced.
(2.) Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that brick-kiln had been closed down on 10th May, 1994 and was operated only for 11 days i.e. from 30th April, 1994 to 10th May, 1994. It is also stated that an intimation of closure had been submitted on 7th June, 1994, stating that brick-kiln had been closed on 10th May, 1994. It is also stated that there was no basis to hold that the brick-kiln operated for 91 days.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand submits that materials, which were placed, have been relied upon and there is no error in the order passed. It is stated that since revisionist has neither maintained books of account, nor has furnished the same at the time of inspection, as such, the authorities were justified in drawing inference against the revisionist.;