Anshuman Singh, J.
1. This revision has been filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act against the judgment dated 29th May, 1984, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, U.P., Kanpur Bench II, relating to the assessment year 1976-77.
2. The assessee deals in sabudana, posta-budi, etc. For the year in question its books of account were accepted and it was assessed to a tax of Rs. 45,960.88 on the taxable sales of Rs. 5,99,637.10. The above taxable sales included sales of posta-budi amounting to Rs. 3,26,859.62. The assessing authority has taxed these sales at the rate of 7 per cent. On appeal the learned Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) treating posta-budi as medicinal herb taxed the same at the rate of 6 per cent. Revenue went up in second appeal before the Tribunal which endorsed the finding of the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) and dismissed the appeal.
3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue has contended that the only question involved in the instant revision is whether posta-budi is a medicine or not. He contended that the Tribunal has not recorded any finding whether posta-budi is used as medicine and is commonly known as medicine or not. That not having been done by the Tribunal, it has not properly appreciated the facts of the case. After hearing the counsel for the parties I am unable to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the revenue. The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that posta-budi is used as medicine. It has also relied on a book named 'Madan Pal Nighantu' in which posta-budi has been mentioned as a medicine. The said fact cannot be said to be wholly irrelevant for determining whether posta-budi was used as medicine or not. In view of the aforesaid fact I am of the opinion that the order passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any error of law and requires no interference by this Court.
4. In the result the revision fails and is accordingly dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.