Mandatory affidavit of service in tax revision led to dismissal where no question of law arose.

A tax revision was held not maintainable because the mandatory affidavit of service required by Chapter 27 Rule 5(2) of the High Court Rules had not been filed even after several years. The Court noted that, although the rule allowed later filing for sufficient reason within the prescribed time, no such compliance was made and continued pendency was unjustified. It also observed that the appellate authorities had already recorded concurrent findings of fact and no question of law arose, leaving no basis to entertain the revision. The revision was therefore dismissed for non-compliance with the procedural service requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision filed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax could be entertained when the affidavit of service required by Chapter 27 Rule 5(2) of the High Court Rules had not been filed for several years.

Analysis: The revision was subject to the procedural requirements applicable to tax revisions under Chapter 27 of the High Court Rules. Rule 5 required an affidavit of service to accompany the revision, and where it could not be filed at once for sufficient reason, it had to be filed within the prescribed time. The Court found that no affidavit of service had been filed despite the revision remaining pending since 2008. In those circumstances, continued pendency and further opportunity to comply were not justified, particularly when the appellate authorities had already recorded concurrent findings of fact and no question of law arose.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable in the absence of compliance with the mandatory service requirement and was dismissed.

---