Abhinava Upadhya, J. - (1.) HEARD learned standing counsel appearing for the Department and Sri K. Saksena, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite party -dealer.
(2.) THE opposite party -dealer carries on the business of manufacture and sale of aerated water, cold drink, etc. The assessing authority after accepting the books of account made original assessment on November 10, 1993. It appears that on July 12, 1993 a survey was made at the business premises of the dealer by the officers of the Special Investigating Branch (SIB) where certain loose documents were seized. It appears that on the basis of the said loose papers an inference was drawn that the dealer had suppressed sale in his books of account that were relied upon for framing of original assessment and therefore, notice was issued for reopening the assessment under Section 21 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. Aggrieved by the reopening of assessment the dealer filed appeal before the first appellate authority which determined the evaded turnover to a sum of Rs. 10,000, but accepted the explanation of the dealer that the paper seized, namely, parchas Nos. 6 and 11, do not reflect the actual turnover of sales but are inflated figures shown only for the purposes of obtaining higher cash credit limit from a bank.
(3.) AGAINST the aforesaid order of the first appellate authority, the Department as well as dealer both filed cross -appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal considered the explanation offered by the dealer to the authorities that the figures mentioned in the loose documents found at the survey do not reflect the actual sale as has been made by the dealer, but are the figures for obtaining higher cash credit limit from the bank. The Tribunal, thereupon recorded a finding that there was no error in the order of the first appellate authority and dismissed both the appeals.;