Finality in tax appeals and appealable demand notices: rectification cannot reopen decided legal questions, and coercive notices may be orders.

A successor appellate authority cannot reopen an earlier order holding an appeal maintainable by invoking rectification, because section 22(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act permits only correction of a mistake apparent on the face of the record and not reconsideration of a concluded question of law. The principle of finality applies within the same proceeding unless the statute expressly allows review. A demand notice under the Act that directs payment, threatens recovery as arrears, and carries penal consequences is an authoritative command and therefore qualifies as an appealable order under section 9.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a successor appellate authority could, on a change of opinion, reopen and reverse an earlier order holding the appeal maintainable; and (ii) whether a demand notice under the U.P. Trade Tax Act is an order appealable under section 9.

Issue (i): Whether a successor appellate authority could, on a change of opinion, reopen and reverse an earlier order holding the appeal maintainable.

Analysis: Section 22(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 permits rectification only of a mistake apparent on the face of the record. A question of law decided earlier after hearing the parties, even if later thought to be erroneous, is not such an apparent mistake. The principle of finality also applies between different stages of the same proceeding, and an issue once decided cannot ordinarily be re-agitated in that proceeding merely because of a subsequent change of opinion by the same authority or its successor.

Conclusion: The successor appellate authority had no power to review and undo the earlier order holding the appeal maintainable. This issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether a demand notice under the U.P. Trade Tax Act is an order appealable under section 9.

Analysis: Section 9(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 allows an appeal by a person aggrieved by an order of the assessing authority. A demand notice in the prescribed form is not a mere intimation; it commands payment of the tax within the specified time, warns of recovery as arrears of land revenue, prosecution, penalty and interest, and therefore constitutes a command or direction authoritatively given. In that sense, it answers the description of an order for the purpose of section 9.

Conclusion: The demand notice is an appealable order under section 9. This issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeds, the dismissal of the appeal for want of maintainability cannot stand, and the appellate authority must hear the appeal on merits in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A question of law finally decided at an earlier stage of the same proceeding cannot be reopened by way of rectification or change of opinion unless the statute expressly permits review, and a demand notice that authoritatively directs payment and carries coercive consequences is an appealable order where the governing appeal provision uses the expression "order".

---