Mandatory affidavit of service and purely factual findings barred revision, leaving no substantial question of law.

A revision under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was held not maintainable because the mandatory affidavit of service required by the High Court Rules had not been filed for years and the assessee had not been served; the Court treated the service requirement as essential, with relaxation available only on sufficient reason within the prescribed time, so non-compliance was fatal. The Court also held that the Tribunal's findings were purely factual and no perversity, illegality, or error of law was shown, so no substantial question of law arose. The revision was therefore rejected against the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revision was liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of filing an affidavit of service and whether the Tribunal's factual findings gave rise to any substantial question of law.

Analysis: The revision was filed under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, and the applicable High Court Rules required an affidavit of service to accompany the revision, with limited relaxation only where sufficient reason existed and the affidavit was filed within the prescribed time. No affidavit of service had been filed for years, and the assessee had not been served. The Court also found that the Tribunal's findings were findings of fact, and nothing was shown to establish perversity, illegality, or any error of law.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable in the absence of compliance with the service requirement and, independently, no question of law arose from the Tribunal's findings. The result was against the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a revision is not filed in accordance with the mandatory service requirements and the Tribunal's findings are purely factual and not shown to be perverse, the revision is liable to be dismissed.

---