Revision confined to the record existing at the penalty order stage; later material cannot unsettle the penalty.

In revision under section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, the revisional authority could examine only the legality or propriety of the penalty order on the basis of the record existing when that order was passed. Material created later could not be used to challenge or invalidate the order. On the record then available, the assessee had not produced the books of account when called upon, and the discrepancy between declared goods and goods found at interception supported the penalty. The penalty order was therefore sustained and no interference was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in revision under section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, the revisional authority could consider only the material forming part of the record at the time of the impugned penalty order, and whether the penalty order required interference.

Analysis: Section 10B empowers revision only for examining the legality or propriety of an existing order on the basis of the record available when that order was passed. Material coming into existence after the impugned order cannot be taken into account for revisional scrutiny. The Court also noted that the assessee had not produced the books of account when called upon, and the discrepancy between the goods declared and the goods found at interception supported the penalty order on the record then available.

Conclusion: The revisional authority was confined to the record as it existed when the penalty order was passed, and no ground for interference with the penalty order was made out.

Final Conclusion: The revision failed because the impugned penalty order was sustainable on the material available at the relevant time and later material could not be used to reopen it.

Ratio Decidendi: In revision under section 10B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, only the record existing at the time of the challenged order can be examined for legality or propriety, and subsequent material cannot be relied upon to invalidate that order.

---