IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2008 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1929 ST.Rev..No. 72 of 2008 ------------------------ TA.501/2006 of S.T.A.TRIBUNAL,ADDL.BENCH,PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER/ASSESSEE/APPELLANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------- C.K.CHANDRASEKHARAN, KALLINGAL HOUSE, KALLINGALCHIRA, PATTANCHERI, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN RESPONDENT/REVENUE/RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED RAFIQ. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.M. JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S.T.Rev. No. 72 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of March, 2008. ORDER H.L.DATTU, CJ, Though the matter is posted for admission, with the consent of both counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing. 2. This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No.501 of 2006 dated 21st April, 2007. 3. The assessee is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (“the KGST Act” for short). 4. For the assessment year 1995-96, the assessing authority has completed the assessments and has fastened the sales tax liability on the assessee. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the assessing authority, the assessee has filed appeal before the first appellate authority without much success. Thereafter, the assessee has preferred the second appeal before the Tribunal. 5. In the Memorandum of Appeal filed, the assessee has raised several contentions not only on the facts, but also on the question of law. The Tribunal, in its order, refers to all the grounds raised by the assessee in the Memorandum of Appeal, but, while confirming the orders passed by the first appellate authority, does not assign any reason whatsoever. The order passed by the Tribunal reads as under: “On an appraisal of the materials relied on for assessments and also considering the fact that the lower authorities had rightly examined the issue involved, we find no reason to S.T.Rev.72/2008. 2 interfere with order of the lower authorities. We therefore confirm the order of lower authorities and dismiss the second appeal.” 6. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee is before us in this revision. The assessee has framed the following questions of law for our consideration and decision: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the Ann.E assessment order which was not in confirmity with the Ann.D Tribunal order. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in confirming the best judgment assessment made against the petitioner without any piece of evidence. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the findings that no opportunity to cross-examine the consignor need be given to the petitioner. 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the views of the assessing authority with regard to the verification of check post records. Has not the Tribunal committed an error in appreciating the facts of the case properly? 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in confirming the views of the lower authorities with regard to the examination of witnesses. 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming an error which was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.” 7. Sri.E.P.Govindan, learned counsel for the assessee would submit that the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is a cryptic and a non-speaking S.T.Rev.72/2008. 3 order and therefore, the same is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution and also the order is arbitrary. 8. We have carefully perused the orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. As we have already noticed, the Tribunal refers to all the grounds raised by the assessee in the Memorandum of Appeal filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, without answering any one of the grounds raised in the Memorandum of Appeal, has passed a non-speaking order. It is needless to say that an order passed without assigning any reason whatsoever is not an order in the eye of law. Therefore, it is difficult to sustain the orders passed by the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal is the last fact finding authority and also the Tribunal can decide all the questions of law framed by the assessee. Without doing so, the Tribunal has, in our opinion, has passed a mechanical order by confirming the orders passed by the first appellate authority. This is not what is expected of the Tribunal, which is constituted under Section 39 of the KGST Act. In view of the above, we cannot sustain the orders passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the order so passed requires to be set aside and the matter requires to be remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with law after considering each one of the grounds raised by the assessee in the Memorandum of Appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE sb.