Statutory reference rights under Assam sales tax law apply only to orders worsening the dealer's position, not mere refusals to revise.

Under Section 32(2) of the Assam Sales Tax Act, a reference lies only from an appellate or revisional order that enhances the assessment or is otherwise prejudicial to the dealer. The term "prejudicial" is used in its technical sense and means an order that places the dealer in a worse position than before; a mere refusal to revise does not meet that test. Where the underlying Section 32(2) application is incompetent because the order is not prejudicial in that sense, the connected applications under Section 32(5) and Section 32(6) cannot be maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for reference under Section 32(2) of the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947 lies only against an order enhancing the assessment or otherwise prejudicial to the dealer, and whether applications under Section 32(5) and Section 32(6) are maintainable when the underlying application under Section 32(2) is incompetent.

Analysis: Section 32(2) permits a reference only from an order of appeal or revision enhancing the assessment of, or otherwise prejudicial to, a dealer, and the expression "prejudicial" was applied in its technical sense as an order placing the dealer in a worse position than before. An order merely refusing to revise, or otherwise not worsening the dealer's position, does not satisfy that test. Since the applications sought reference from orders that were not prejudicial in that sense, no valid application under Section 32(2) existed. The dependent applications under sub-sections (5) and (6) could not therefore be maintained.

Conclusion: The reference applications were not maintainable, and the challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The statutory right of reference under the Act was confined to orders that worsened the dealer's position, and the rejected revision orders did not fall within that category.

Ratio Decidendi: An order is "prejudicial" for the purpose of a statutory reference provision only if it places the dealer in a worse position than the order under review; a mere refusal to interfere is not such an order.

---