Suo motu revision under sales tax law may be invoked at an assessee's instance despite a time-barred appeal.

A suo motu revisional power under section 34(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was treated as capable of being triggered by an aggrieved assessee bringing relevant facts to the Board of Revenue's notice, even though the power is formally described as suo motu. The text also notes that an appeal dismissed as time-barred, or otherwise not entertained, is not an effective appeal for section 34(2)(b) and does not bar revisional recourse on that footing. The discussion therefore centres on the breadth of revisional jurisdiction and the limited effect of a non-entertained appeal on access to revision.

---

---

Issues: Whether an aggrieved assessee could move the Board of Revenue to invoke its suo motu revisional power under section 34(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, and whether rejection of the earlier appeal as time-barred prevented recourse under section 34(2)(b).

Analysis: The Board's power of revision was described as suo motu, but its substance was not confined to action initiated only by the Board itself. An aggrieved assessee could bring the matter to the Board's notice so that the power might be exercised in a fit case. The Court also agreed that an appeal dismissed as time-barred or refused to be entertained is not an effective appeal for the purpose of section 34(2)(b), and therefore does not stand in the way on that footing.

Conclusion: The assessee's application under section 34(1) was maintainable, and the Board was wrong in rejecting it in limine.

Final Conclusion: The petitions succeeded and the matter was required to be considered afresh by the Board in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A power described as suo motu may still be activated by an aggrieved party bringing relevant facts to the authority's notice, and a time-barred or otherwise non-entertained appeal is not an effective appeal for excluding revisional recourse under the statute.

---