Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Deputy Commissioner's order revising the assessment by restoring the tax rate to the correct rate was one made under revisional power, or one made in respect of escaped assessment so as to attract the shorter limitation period.
Analysis: The power of revision under section 20 and the power to reopen an escaped assessment under section 14(4) operate in different fields. Revision under section 20 is exercised on the material already on record to test the legality, propriety, or regularity of the assessment order, whereas section 14(4) is attracted when, on fresh material or information, turnover has escaped assessment, been under-assessed, or assessed at a lower rate. The Deputy Commissioner acted avowedly under section 20 and only on the same assessment record. The correction of the rate of tax by itself did not convert the action into one under section 14(4). The limitation in section 14(4-A) therefore had no application, and the revisional order was within the limitation prescribed by section 20(3).
Conclusion: The limitation plea failed, and the revisional order was held to be valid under section 20.
Ratio Decidendi: A revision on the existing assessment record falls within revisional jurisdiction and is distinct from reopening of escaped assessment, which requires fresh material or information.