Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The second question also as framed does not raise any question of law. The ultimate estimate of the turnover is a question of fact and, supported as it is, on the material on record cannot be questioned in a reference. However, the learned counsel stated that the revising authority had enhanced the assessment by increasing the turnover taxable at 2 per cent from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 15,000 which was beyond his jurisdiction. It is true that the revising authority at the material time had no jurisdiction to enhance an assessment. But we find that the revising authority has not made any enhancement. An assessment can be said to have been enhanced only if the tax assessed has been enhanced. Changes in the quantum of the turnover and its classification does not mean enhancement, if the tax assessed is not enhanced as a result thereof. In the instant case, the revising authority had enhanced the rate from 7 per cent to 10 per cent on the first category of sales, but had decreased the turnover of this category. With regard to the second category of sales he had enhanced the turnover. The net result of these changes, however, was that the tax assessed for the assessment year 1966-67 was maintained at Rs. 2,300 while the tax for the year 1967-68 was reduced by Rs. 50. Obviously this cannot be said to be a case of enhancement.