Appellate power cannot enhance an unappealed, final assessment part; reopening must follow the statute's separate mechanisms.

An appellate authority under section 9(3)(a)(ii) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 may vary an assessment only within the subject-matter of the dealer's appeal. Where the assessee did not challenge the rate of tax on cashmilon, that part of the assessment attained finality and could not be enhanced in appeal merely because the statute refers to variation "otherwise". Reopening a final assessment at a higher rate lay under section 21, while suo motu revision belonged to the Commissioner under section 10-B. The appellate enhancement on the unappealed portion was therefore without jurisdiction and invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority under section 9(3)(a)(ii) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 could enhance the rate of tax on that part of the assessment which was not challenged in appeal and had become final.

Analysis: The revision concerned an assessment where the assessee had appealed only against rejection of books of account and enhancement of turnover, not against the rate of tax on cashmilon. The Court held that the part of the assessment not appealed against attained finality and did not become part of the appellate subject-matter. The words "whether such reduction or enhancement arising from a point raised in the grounds of appeal or otherwise" were construed as enabling the appellate authority to deal with reduction or enhancement only within the subject-matter of the appeal, not to reopen an accepted and final part of the assessment. The Court further held that reopening an assessment at a higher rate lay under section 21, and suo motu revision belonged to the Commissioner under section 10-B, not to the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The appellate authority had no jurisdiction to enhance the tax rate on the unappealed and final part of the assessment; the enhancement was invalid.

Final Conclusion: The unchallenged portion of the assessment remained closed unless validly reopened under the Act, and the appellate authority could not, in the assessee's appeal, assume revisional power to increase the tax liability on that portion.

Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal by the dealer, the appellate authority may vary the assessment only with reference to the subject-matter of the appeal; an unappealed and final part of the assessment cannot be enhanced by the appellate authority merely because the statute permits variation "otherwise".

---