JUDGMENT
Abdul Hadi, J.
1. The assessee, who is a dealer in chappals, has filed this revision under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act after having failed before all the three authorities including the Tribunal. The assessment was a best judgment assessment and on reading the Tribunal’s order, we find the following factual findings only :
“(1) The learned Authorised Representative has argued that the entries in slips have been misconstrued as representing sale suppression. On a verification of the entries in slips, we are not able to agree with the learned Authorised Representative. The assessing authority had dealt with in detail the entries noted in various slips, namely, Nos. 1, 3 and 4, in his order of assessment.
(2) Besides, the learned Authorised Representative has contended that the entries in pocket note books marked A and B do not suggest any sale suppression. Here again, the entries clearly bring out clandestine sales of chappals to various dealers. The assessing authority, in fact, has noted the details of persons to whom the goods were sold and the amounts for which the goods were sold in page 4 of the assessment order.
(3) The assessing authority has further provided a sum of Rs. 18,896 calculated at 10 per cent of the actual suppression towards the torn pages in the pocket note-book B. In the circumstances of the case, the above addition cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable.”
2. As against these factual findings, the only “question of law” as alleged in the revision grounds runs as follows :
“Has not the Tribunal decided the issue erroneously without properly considering the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Thus, even the alleged question of law, as framed by the assessee in the revision petition, is actually not a question of law at all.
4. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner only argued that with reference to the entries in the above slips and pocket note-books, the authorities should have made necessary verifications from the third parties concerned. But, it must be stated that if there is truth on the side of the petitioner, it could have examined the said third parties and it could have also sought for such examination, before the assessing authority. But, no such attempt has been done, admittedly, in the present case. Therefore, there is absolutely, no merit in this revision under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and accordingly, this revision is dismissed. No costs.
5. Petition dismissed.