Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) In view of the submissions advanced, the question of law is reframed as under: "Whether after accepting the principle that electricity consumption could not form the basis of making best judgment assessment the tribunal could have denied the consequential relief to the assessee by noticing variation in monthly consumption of electricity."
(3.) The present revision has arisen for assessment year 2012-13 (U.P) under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred as to 'VAT Act'). The applicant is a registered dealer engaged in manufacture and sale of M.S. Ignot. For the assessment year 2012-13 (U.P.) it filed a return admitting tax liability at Rs. 2,73,67,026.60/-.;