Compounding finality limits revisional power: concluded suppression cannot be reopened to enhance the compounding fee.

Compounding under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act was treated as final and conclusive between the parties, so the Deputy Commissioner could not invoke suo motu revisional power to reopen the matter and increase the compounding fee on the ground that the suppression was of a larger magnitude. The note states that acceptance of the suppression detected at inspection was implicit in the compounding order, and the revisional jurisdiction under section 35 could not be used to reassess the same concluded issue. Reopening and enhancement of the fee were therefore impermissible, and the assessee succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after compounding under section 47 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, the Deputy Commissioner could invoke suo motu revisional power under section 35 of the Act to reopen the matter and enhance the compounding fee on the ground that the suppression was of a larger magnitude.

Analysis: Once the matter had been compounded, the compounding order was treated as conclusive between the parties. The acceptance of the suppression detected at the time of inspection was implicit in that order, and it was not open to the Deputy Commissioner to revisit the same issue under section 35 on the premise that the suppression was higher and that a greater compounding fee ought to have been levied. The revisional power could not be used to reopen a matter already concluded by compounding.

Conclusion: The reopening and enhancement of the compounding fee were impermissible, and the assessee succeeded.

---