Mandatory affidavit of service and unassailable factual findings defeat tax revision by the Revenue

A tax revision was held not maintainable where the Revenue failed to comply with the mandatory affidavit-of-service requirement under the High Court Rules, because the assessee remained unserved and no sufficient reason was shown for the omission. On merits, the Tribunal's findings of fact were not shown to suffer from any error of fact or law, so no interference in revision was justified. The revision therefore failed on both procedural non-compliance and substantive grounds, leaving the Tribunal's decision undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a revision filed by the Revenue under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 could be entertained without compliance with the affidavit-of-service requirement under Rule 5(2) of Chapter 27 of the High Court Rules, 1952. (ii) Whether the Tribunal's findings warranted interference in revision.

Issue (i): Whether a revision filed by the Revenue under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 could be entertained without compliance with the affidavit-of-service requirement under Rule 5(2) of Chapter 27 of the High Court Rules, 1952.

Analysis: The prescribed procedure required the Revenue to serve the revision upon the assessee and to file an affidavit of service, with limited relaxation only where the affidavit could not accompany the revision for sufficient reason and was then filed within the stipulated period. Where no affidavit was filed for years and the assessee remained unserved, the revision was not filed in the manner required by the Rules.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable in the absence of compliance with the affidavit-of-service requirement, and this issue was decided against the Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether the Tribunal's findings warranted interference in revision.

Analysis: The Tribunal had recorded findings of fact, and nothing was shown to demonstrate any error of fact or law in those findings. In such circumstances, no interference in revision was justified.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's findings did not call for interference, and this issue was also decided against the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The revision failed both on procedural non-compliance and on merits, leaving the Tribunal's decision undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Revenue fails to comply with the mandatory affidavit-of-service requirement for a tax revision and no legal or factual error is shown in the Tribunal's findings, the revision is liable to be dismissed.

---