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 MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 S.T.Rev..No. 226 of 2006 --------------- ------------------------- ORDER DATED 27.2.2006 IN TA.448/2005 OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE -------------------------------------------------------------------- E.ABDUL SALAM, TRANSWORLD MARKETING MARBLE, KUTTIYIL, VANIYAMBALAM.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE --------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2008 ALONG WITH S.T.REV.NO.228 OF 2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev.Nos.226 & 228 of 2006 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of July, 2008 O R D E R H.L.Dattu, C.J. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these revision petitions, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order. 2. The assessee is a dealer in marbles and glazed tiles. He is an assessee under the provisions of Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. For the assessment years 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 he had filed annual returns conceding his total and taxable turnover. The assessing authority rejected the return and completed the best judgment assessment for the assessment year 2001-2002 and thereby the taxable turnover was enhanced to Rs.18,23,010 as against the declared turnover of Rs.15,72,105.00, solely on the ground that the freight charges accounted was very low compared to the prevailing rate. Aggrieved by the best judgment assessment order passed, the petitioner filed first appeal before the first appellate authority. The appellate authority allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the additions made by the assessing authority. The revenue being aggrieved by the order passed by the first S.T.Rev.No.226,228/2006 -2- appellate authority has carried the matter before the Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No.448/05. 3. For the assessment year 2002-03, the assessing authority had passed best judgment assessment and the said order came to be modified by the first appellate authority. The revenue being aggrieved by the said order has filed second appeals before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A. No.449/05. 4. The assessee had preferred C.O. No.82/05 before the Appellate Tribunal in both these appeals. 5. The Tribunal by its common order dated 27th February, 2006 has allowed the Revenue's appeal and has rejected the cross objection filed by the assessee. In the orders passed, the Tribunal has only stated as under: “ The point: On a detailed evaluation and analysis of entire contentions and evidence on record it would conclusively prove the case of the appellant. It is evidenced from the records coupled with the plea of the appellant that the lower appellate authority passed erroneous orders, which are not sustainable in law. If these orders are allowed to be S.T.Rev.No.226,228/2006 -3- sustained, there will be miscarriage of justice. Thus the orders under appeal are set aside and this point is only to be answered in favour of the appellant. It is answered accordingly.” 6. In the hierarchy of the authorities under the Sales Tax Act, the Tribunal is the last fact finding authority. The Tribunal is also empowered to decide the question of law. The Tribunal, while reversing/modifying the orders passed by the first appellate authority is expected to apply its mind to the facts of the case and pass a reasoned order. Findings based on no reason are no findings at all. 7. We have carefully perused the orders passed by the appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, while modifying/reversing the orders passed by the first appellate authority has not assigned any reason whatsoever. In that view of the matter, in our opinion, it is difficult to sustain the orders passed by the Tribunal. Therefore the following: Order i). The Revision Petitions are allowed. ii). The impugned orders passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal are set aside. iii). The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh S.T.Rev.No.226,228/2006 -4- disposal, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 8. All pending interlocutory orders are closed. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS/dk