IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 17TH JULY 2008 / 26TH ASHADHA 1930 S.T.Rev..No. 201 of 2008 --------------- ------------------------- ORDER DATED 10.12.2007 IN TA.235/2006 OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER/ASSESSEE/RESPONDENT:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SRI. S. IQBAL, POOJA TEXTILES AND READYMADES, ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN SRI.P.VISWAMBHARAN RESPONDENT/REVENUE/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev.No.201 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 17th day of July, 2008 ORDER H.L.Dattu, C.J. This Sales Tax Revision is filed by the assessee being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram in T.A.No.235 of 2006 dated 10th December, 2007 for the assessment year 2004-05. 2. The Tribunal while rejecting the assessee's second appeal, firstly, has extracted 16 defects pointed out by the assessing authority in the pre-assessment notice issued by the assessing authority before passing the best judgment assessment and thereafter it has concluded as under: “13. Considering the nature of the defects pointed out by the assessing authority we are of the opinion that the assessing authority has successfully established pattern of large scale suppression in the purchase of readymade goods especially in taxable goods which the appellant failed to rebut with convincing evidence. The contention of the counsel for the appellant that the defects pointed out by the assessing authority are not existing and are only misclassification with are corrected in the annual account is only a hollow statement not supported with evidence. In this circumstances we find no reason to interfere with the order of the first appellate S.T.Rev.No.201 of 2008 2 authority in which adequate relief has been granted to the appellant. Hence we uphold the order of the first appellate authority.” 3. This Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 can modify/annul the orders passed by the Tribunal provided the Tribunal has erroneously decided a question of law or has failed to decide a question of law or if the finding of the Tribunal is a perverse finding. 4. Having gone through the orders passed by the Tribunal, in our opinion, none of the ingredients which we have noted earlier, is present in this case. Therefore, this revision petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns