Communication of assessment order is essential before suo motu revision can validly begin under sales tax law.

Proceedings for revision continued despite repeal of the earlier sales tax statute because assessment steps had already begun before the new Act commenced, so the matter was treated as pending and the repeal objection failed. Suo motu revisional power under section 32 could not be exercised before the assessment order was communicated to the assessee, because the appeal period could not run and effective notice to show cause depended on such communication. The revisional notices were therefore held illegal and without jurisdiction, and the communication-based objection succeeded.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether proceedings for revision could be continued after repeal of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, when assessment steps had already been taken before the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 came into force; (ii) Whether the Deputy Commissioner could exercise suo motu revisional power under section 32 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 before the assessment order sought to be revised had been communicated to the assessee.

Issue (i): Whether proceedings for revision could be continued after repeal of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, when assessment steps had already been taken before the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 came into force.

Analysis: The assessment records showed that action had already been initiated against the dealer before the new Act commenced, including calling for accounts, scrutiny of accounts, and determination of turnover. On that footing, proceedings were pending on the date of commencement of the 1959 Act. The repeal provision did not extinguish such pending proceedings, and the objection based on absence of pending proceedings at the date of repeal failed.

Conclusion: This objection was rejected and the continuation of proceedings was held to be competent.

Issue (ii): Whether the Deputy Commissioner could exercise suo motu revisional power under section 32 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 before the assessment order sought to be revised had been communicated to the assessee.

Analysis: Section 32 was treated as a revisional power directed against an existing assessment order after the time for appeal had expired. The period for appeal could not begin until the order was communicated to the assessee. Since the assessment order had never been communicated, the statutory condition in section 32(2)(c) was not satisfied. Independently, revision could not lawfully proceed without notice to the person affected by the order, because an effective opportunity to show cause presupposed knowledge of the order proposed to be revised. The validity of the assessment order itself was also doubted for failure to follow the prescribed procedure under the rules, but the decision rested on the want of communication and consequent want of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The revisional notices were held to be illegal and without jurisdiction, and the objection succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The revisional action failed because the assessment order had not been communicated to the assessee, although the repeal-based challenge did not succeed.

Ratio Decidendi: A suo motu revisional power against an assessment order cannot be exercised until the order has been communicated to the assessee, since the period for appeal and the requirement of notice to show cause both depend on such communication.

---