Revisional jurisdiction limited to questions of law; factual disputes over accounts and turnover could not sustain revision.

Revisional jurisdiction under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act arises only where the Tribunal has decided a question of law incorrectly or failed to decide one. Questions relating to appreciation of evidence, support for business loss, explanation for projected loss, addition to turnover, and rejection of accounts were treated as factual matters rather than questions of law. On that basis, the revision petition did not disclose a maintainable legal issue for interference and was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the questions framed in the revision petition under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act were questions of law so as to confer revisional jurisdiction on the High Court.

Analysis: Revisional jurisdiction under section 41 arises only when the Tribunal has erroneously decided a question of law or failed to decide a question of law. The questions formulated by the assessee related to appreciation of evidence, support for business loss, explanation for projected loss, addition to turnover, and rejection of accounts. These matters were held to be purely factual in nature and not questions of law.

Conclusion: The revision petition was not maintainable and was rejected.

---