Revisional power under sales tax law upheld: prescribed officers may correct an improper assessment after notice and enquiry.

Where the sales tax statute authorised prescribed officers to exercise revisional power, the Commercial Tax Officer could examine the record, issue notice, hold enquiry, and correct an assessment found illegal or improper. The enhancement of turnover on the basis of suppression and manipulation of accounts was treated as a valid exercise of revisional, not appellate, jurisdiction, and the challenge to Rule 14A as ultra vires failed because the statute permitted such delegation. The revisional assessment was therefore upheld and the assessee's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commercial Tax Officer, acting under the unamended section 12 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 and the relevant rules, had power to revise the assessment and enhance the turnover while dealing with the assessee's appeal; whether Rule 14A was ultra vires; and whether the revisional order was otherwise vitiated.

Analysis: Section 11 conferred the right of appeal, but orders in appeal remained subject to the revisional power under section 12. Under section 12(1), the Board of Revenue, and such authorities or officers as prescribed, could call for and examine the record of any order to satisfy themselves as to its legality or propriety and pass such order as they thought fit. Rule 14 authorised the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and the Commercial Tax Officer to exercise that revisional power, and Rule 14A required notice and enquiry before the correct tax payable could be determined where the tax appeared to be less than the correct amount. The challenge that Rule 14A was ultra vires failed because the statute itself permitted delegation of revisional power to prescribed authorities. The order disclosed that notice was issued, enquiry was held, and the assessee was heard before the turnover was revised on the basis of suppression and manipulation of accounts. The revisional authority was entitled to correct an assessment that was not legal or proper, and the enhancement of turnover was treated as an exercise of revisional, not appellate, power.

Conclusion: The Commercial Tax Officer had jurisdiction to revise the assessment and enhance the turnover, Rule 14A was intra vires, and the revisional order was valid.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's challenge to the revisional assessment failed, and the dismissal of the second appeal was affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute permits prescribed authorities to exercise revisional power, they may correct an assessment found to be illegal or improper after notice and enquiry, even if the matter arises in an assessee's appeal.

---