ORDER DR. A. S. ANAND, C.J. - The Revenue is in revision against the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Second Additional Bench), Madras dated March 12, 1981. The controversy is limited in its scope. The Tribunal found that the transport charges had been charged separately from that of the goods sold and that the purchase order was, in fact, a blend of two agreements in the same contract, one for supply of the material and another for transportation, specifying the cost and transport charges separately and went on to hold that the transport charges were an expenditure incurred after the sale and did not form a part of the sale price itself. On recording this finding, the Tribunal ordered the deletion of a turnover of Rs. 27,749.34. We find from a perusal of the order of the Tribunal that it recorded a specific finding that the contract and purchase order evidenced that there were two agreements in the same contract, one for supply of the material and another for transport and that the costs and transport charges had been shown separately. It was on the interpretation of the contract and purchase order that the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the transport charges were post-sale charges and that the commodity had been sold by the assessee ex-godown. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) indeed relied upon the finding recorded by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to interpret the contract and the purchase order to imply a single contract and held that even though the transport charges had been shown separately, it was included in the sale price of the commodity itself. In our opinion, the interpretation placed by the Tribunal on the contract and purchase order cannot be said to be either perverse or wholly unreasonable. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that two interpretations were possible on the construction of the contract-cum-purchase order, the court would lean in favour of the interpretation which is in favour of the assessee, particularly when that is the interpretation placed, on a proper construction of the document, by the final fact-finding authority, i.e., the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal, therefore, does not suffer from any error. Consequently the revision fails and is dismissed but without costs. Petition dismissed.