Revisional interference limited to questions of law where turnover estimation follows rejected accounts and proved suppression.

Revisional interference under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 is limited to cases where the Tribunal has wrongly decided or omitted a question of law. Where accounts were rejected for proved suppression in jewellery trade, excess stock was found on inspection, the suppression was substantial and admitted, and there had been earlier similar rejection of accounts, the Tribunal's turnover estimate was treated as a factual assessment. As no legal perversity or jurisdictional error was shown, interference in revision was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference in revision was warranted with the Tribunal's estimation of turnover after rejection of the assessee's accounts in the context of proved suppression in jewellery trade.

Analysis: The revisional power under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 is confined to cases where the Tribunal has erroneously decided a question or failed to decide a question of law. The accounts had been rejected on the basis of suppression, excess stock was detected on inspection, the suppression was substantial and admitted, and the assessee had earlier faced similar rejection of accounts. The Tribunal's estimate of turnover was therefore based on the factual matrix and was not shown to be legally perverse or beyond jurisdiction.

Conclusion: Interference in revision was not called for, and the challenge to the Tribunal's order failed.

---