M. C. AGARWAL, J. - (1.) This revision petition under section 11 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act is directed against an order dated 31st March, 1989, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad whereby it allowed the Commissioner's appeal and reversing the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), restored the levy of interest under section 8 (1) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. I have heard Sri Piyush Agarwal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri R. D. Gupta, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. The dealer deals in ash handling plants. The question was whether sales in respect of supply of some such plants was complete during the year under consideration or was completed in the assessment year in which the erection of the plant was completed. The assessing officer held that the sales had been completed in the year under consideration and levied interest under section 8 (1) of the Act on the amount of tax representing those sales. On appeal the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) held that the dealer's contention that the concerned sales were not completed within the year under consideration was bona fide and, therefore, no interest was leviable. On the Commissioner's appeal, the Tribunal has restored the levy of interest following a judgment of the honourable Supreme Court in Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer [1981] 48 STC 466; 1981 UPTC 1329. That judgment stands overruled by the honourable Supreme Court in J. K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officer [1994] 94 STC 422; 1994 UPTC 893 in which it was held that so long as the assessee pays the tax which according to him is due on the basis of information supplied in return filed by him, there would be no default on his part to meet his statutory obligation. The honourable Supreme Court further observed that it would be difficult to hold that the law envisages the assessee to predict the final assessment and expect him to pay the tax on that basis to avoid the liability to pay interest. In this case the learned Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) had held that the claim of the dealer that the sales were not completed was bona fide. This finding was reversed solely following the judgment of the honourable Supreme Court in Associated Cement Co. 's case [1981] 48 STC 466; 1981 UPTC 1329 which is no longer good law. For the above reason, this revision petition is allowed. The Tribunal's order dated 31st March, 1989, is set aside and it is ordered that the Commissioner's second appeal No. 592 of 1983 for the assessment year 1974-75 stands dismissed. Petition allowed. .;