Revisional power over legality or propriety extends to correcting erroneous factual findings recorded by the appellate authority.

A revisional power confined to examining the "legality or propriety" of an order was held wide enough to permit interference with an erroneous factual finding recorded by an appellate authority on the material before it. The Commissioner could therefore reappraise the record and reverse the factual conclusion where it was wrong. The question was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner, in exercise of revisional power under section 21(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, could interfere with and reverse a factual finding recorded by the appellate authority.

Analysis: The revisional provision empowered the Commissioner to call for the record of proceedings disposed of by a subordinate authority to satisfy himself as to the legality or propriety of the order and to pass such order as he thought fit. The expression "legality or propriety" was treated as wide enough to permit scrutiny of factual conclusions where the appellate authority had gone wrong on the record. The view was supported by the construction earlier placed on similarly worded revisional provisions, under which interference with an erroneous finding of fact was held permissible.

Conclusion: The Commissioner was competent to reverse the factual finding and the question referred was answered in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: A revisional power extending to the "legality or propriety" of an order authorises interference not only with legal errors but also with erroneous findings of fact recorded on the material before the subordinate authority.

---