Revisional jurisdiction is limited to erroneous or omitted questions of law, not disputes already examined on applicable rates.

Revisional interference under section 15-B of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 is confined to cases where the Appellate Tribunal has either erroneously decided a question of law or failed to decide one. Where the Tribunal has proceeded on a concession and has not wrongly determined, or omitted to determine, any legal question, revision is not maintainable. A dispute limited to the applicable rate for different periods, which the Tribunal has already examined and resolved by fixing different prices accordingly, does not satisfy the statutory condition for revision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could interfere in revision under section 15-B of the General Sales Tax Act, 1125, on the ground that the Appellate Tribunal had either erroneously decided or failed to decide a question of law.

Analysis: Revisional jurisdiction under section 15-B was confined to cases where the Appellate Tribunal had either decided a question of law erroneously or failed to decide one. The Tribunal's order showed that it proceeded on the basis of a concession and did not decide any question of law wrongly or omit to decide one. The remaining dispute concerned the rate applicable for different periods, and the Tribunal had examined that contention and fixed different prices accordingly.

Conclusion: The condition for invoking revision was not satisfied and the petition failed.

Final Conclusion: The revision petition was dismissed as no revisable question of law was shown.

Ratio Decidendi: Revisional interference under section 15-B lies only where the Tribunal has erroneously decided, or failed to decide, a question of law.

---