SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The Court:- The legal issue that the Revenue has raised in this appeal is whether the Appellate Tribunal could have disregarded the value of the unaccounted purchases made by the assessee and required additional tax to be imposed by taking into account notional sales when no corresponding sales had taken place during the relevant assessment year.
(2.) In course of survey operations conducted on March 24, 2010 at the rice mill of the assessee, it was discovered that there were large quantities of undisclosed stocks. The assessing officer did not weigh the additional stocks but went by the number of bags since the bags, presumably, were of uniform or standard weight.
(3.) The assessing officer discovered the undisclosed quantum of paddy to be to the extent of 37647 quintal. The excess stock of rice was to the extent of 581 quintal and the excess stock of bran was to the extent of 45 quintal. It also appears that the undisclosed, excess stocks were corroborated by the entries in certain registers maintained at the relevant point of time at the rice mill and certain confessional statements were made by or on behalf of the assessee. On the basis of the additional stocks found, the assessing officer assessed the total taxable income to be to the extent of Rs. 3.92 crore and a tax demand in excess of Rs. 1.61 crore was made on the assessee.;