JUDGMENT Bharati Sapru, J. -- Cause shown is sufficient; delay in filing the revision is condoned. This revision has been filed by the State for the assessment year 2009-10 against the order of the Tribunal dated 05.05.2011. The question of law referred to is hereunder: - "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commercial Tax Tribunal was legally justified in setting aside the penalty under Section 48 (5) of U.P. Value Added Tax Act whereas the dealer was found carrying on the business beyond the books of account with an intention to evade the tax?" 2. The Tribunal has deleted the penalty imposed on the assessee under Section 48 (5) of the Act after recording findings that both the seller and purchasers firm were registered. The tax invoices, which were the primary documents were found duly endorsed in the books of account and the taxes were found to be paid in U.P. The order passed by the Tribunal deleting the penalty is justified. 3. In view of the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal, no question of law arises. No other question was argued. 4. This revision has no merit, it is dismissed. No costs.