JUDGMENT Bharati Sapru, J. -- Cause shown is sufficient; delay in filing the revision is condone. This revision has been filed by the State for the assessment year 2006-07 (central) against the order of the Tribunal dated 13.08.2010. The question of law referred to is hereunder: - "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified that the dealer who supply the machinery and parts to sugar manufactures was liable to tax @ 2.5% and not 4% in view of notification dated 163 dated 15.104?" 2. The Tribunal has relied on the decision in the case of Uttam Sugar Mills and has come to the conclusion that the assessee who is both a manufacturer of sugar and its bye-products and is entitled to the benefit of Notification dated 15.01.2004, it granted to such manufacturers a benefit of tax @ 2.5%. 3. In view of the undisputed facts of the case, no question of law arises. No other question was argued. 4. This revision has no merit, it is dismissed. No costs. 5. Sri Shubham Agrawal, Advocate has appeared on behalf of the assessee.