Concurrent factual findings and burden of proof controlled revision over lubricating oil sales tax liability

Revision under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act was confined to factual issues, so concurrent findings below were not ordinarily open to interference. The assessee's claim that the Tribunal ignored additional evidence was rejected because the record did not show acceptance of those documents or any ignoring of relevant material. The assessee also failed to prove that the lubricating oil had already suffered sales tax in the purchaser's hands. On those factual findings, the lubricating oil sales remained taxable for the assessment year in question.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee could succeed in revision by contending that the Tribunal failed to consider evidence and by disputing the factual finding that the lubricating oil sales were liable to sales tax.

Analysis: The assessment year in question was governed by concurrent factual findings recorded by the authorities below. The record did not show that the Tribunal had accepted the alleged additional documents in evidence, and there was no basis to hold that relevant material was ignored. The assessee also failed to establish that the lubricating oil had already suffered sales tax in the hands of the purchaser. The challenge therefore turned entirely on factual determinations, which are not ordinarily open to interference in revision under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.

Conclusion: The revision failed, and the assessee's liability to sales tax on the lubricating oil sales for 1987-88 was upheld.

---