Concurrent factual findings on estimated turnover cannot be disturbed in revision absent a question of law.

Estimated turnover additions based on unreliable books of account were upheld because the assessee had not maintained proper records and the authorities had assessed liability on the material before them. The Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, affirmed the appellate order, and the High Court found no legal infirmity in those concurrent findings. Estimation of turnover was treated as a question of fact, so revision under section 58 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 could not be maintained absent any question of law. The revisions were therefore not entertained and the Tribunal's order remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order upholding estimated additions to turnover could be interfered with in revision under section 58 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008.

Analysis: The assessee's books of account were found unreliable in survey, no proper books were maintained, and the authorities made additions on estimate basis after considering the material on record. The Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, affirmed the appellate order. Estimation of turnover is a question of fact, and no legal infirmity was shown in the concurrent findings.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable on any question of law and the Tribunal's order was sustained.

Final Conclusion: Concurrent factual findings on estimated tax liability were left undisturbed, and the revisions failed.

Ratio Decidendi: In revision, concurrent findings based on estimation and assessment of facts will not be interfered with unless they give rise to a question of law.

---