Accrued rights on repeal controlled the revision period, so the later revisional limit could not displace the earlier time bar.

Where a repeal preserves accrued rights, the revisional power must be tested against the time-limit attached to the assessment period under the repealed law. An assessment made when the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007 was in force remained protected by section 12(1), which barred revision after two years and conferred a vested procedural safeguard on the dealer. Section 52(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1959 saved those accrued rights and could not be used to substitute the later three-year revision period in section 39(2), because that provision was inconsistent with the earlier bar. The revision was therefore time-barred under the repealed Act and the assessee succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after repeal of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007, the Commissioner's power to revise an assessment made for the pre-repeal period was governed by section 39(2) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1959, or by section 12(1) of the repealed Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007.

Analysis: The assessment related to a period when the Madhya Bharat Act was in force. Section 12(1) of that Act barred revision after two years and therefore conferred a protected right on the dealer that the assessment would not be altered to his prejudice after the prescribed period. Section 52(1) of the 1959 Act preserved rights already acquired or accrued under the repealed Act and deemed actions taken under the repealed Act to be under the new Act only so far as they were not inconsistent with the new Act. Since section 39(2) of the 1959 Act allowed revision within three years, it was inconsistent with the earlier two-year bar. The saving provision could not be used to displace the accrued protection under the repealed Act.

Conclusion: The governing provision remained section 12(1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007, and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise the assessment under section 39(2) of the 1959 Act.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment revision was held to be time-barred under the repealed law, so the appeal of the revenue failed and the assessee succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a repealing statute preserves accrued rights and the new revisional provision is inconsistent with the time-limit under the repealed Act, revision of an assessment relating to the earlier period must be governed by the repealed Act.

---