Express statutory authority is required for review under fiscal law; Chief Commissioner's review notice was invalid.

A power of review under a fiscal statute must be conferred by clear and express words; it cannot arise by implication, strained construction, or inherent jurisdiction. Under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as extended to Delhi, section 20(4) allowed review only by a person appointed under section 3, and the Chief Commissioner was not such a person. The statutory scheme treated the Chief Commissioner as the final revising authority, so the impugned notice calling for review was invalid and liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Chief Commissioner had power to review his earlier order under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as extended to Delhi, and whether the impugned notice calling for review was valid.

Analysis: The power of review was held to depend on express statutory authority. Section 20(4) permitted review by a person appointed under section 3, but the Chief Commissioner was not such a person. The scheme of the Act treated the Chief Commissioner as the final revising authority, and the rules also supported the view that review under section 20(4) was contemplated for the Commissioner or other appointed officers, not for the Chief Commissioner. In a fiscal statute, any ambiguity had to be resolved in favour of the subject, and the provision could not be stretched to confer a review power by implication or inherent jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The Chief Commissioner had no power to review, and the notice dated 3 October 1958 was invalid and liable to be quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: A power of review in a fiscal statute must be conferred by clear and express words and cannot be inferred by implication, strained construction, or inherent jurisdiction.

---