Assessment under Kerala VAT law requires proof of business activity in the premises; unverified inference cannot sustain liability.

A person cannot be assessed under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act unless the authority proves by acceptable evidence that the person was carrying on business in the relevant premises. Here, the inspection materials did not reliably identify the premises or establish occupation, ownership, building details, or property-tax records, and the partnership deed and lease deed did not fill that evidentiary gap. The assessments for 2008-09 and 2009-10 were therefore unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person not proved to be conducting business in the inspected premises can be assessed under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act along with the dealer occupying the premises.

Analysis: The assessment could not be sustained because the materials relied on by the authorities did not establish, on acceptable evidence, that the revision petitioner was conducting business in the inspected premises. The inspection records did not identify the business premises with supporting details such as building number, ownership, occupation, or property-tax records, and the findings were not backed by reliable evidence. The case was not one where the assessment could be justified on the footing of the ingredients of Section 26 of the Act, and the partnership deed and lease deed produced by the appellant did not supply the missing evidentiary basis for the assessments.

Conclusion: The question of law was answered in favour of the appellant, and the assessments for 2008-09 and 2009-10 were held unsustainable and set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessment under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act cannot be sustained against a person unless the authority establishes by acceptable evidence that such person was carrying on business in the relevant premises; a mere allegation or unverified inference is insufficient.

---