Revisional jurisdiction barred where assessments followed binding Supreme Court directions and were not erroneous under revenue revision law.

Section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act permits revision only where the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. An assessment framed by the subordinate authority in strict compliance with binding directions of the Supreme Court under Article 141 cannot be treated as erroneous merely because a later Supreme Court decision took a different view. The later decision in Premier Breweries did not justify reopening assessments already made in accordance with the directions in the assessee's own case. As the essential condition for revision was absent, the revisional authority lacked jurisdiction, and the Tribunal was correct in setting aside the revision orders.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Joint Commissioner could invoke revisional power under section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 to revise assessment orders passed by the assessing authority in compliance with directions issued by the Supreme Court, solely because of a later Supreme Court decision.

Analysis: Section 21(2) permits revision only when the order sought to be revised is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. An assessment made by the subordinate authority in faithful compliance with binding directions issued by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India cannot be characterised as erroneous. The later decision in Premier Breweries did not authorise the revisional authority to disregard assessment orders already framed in accordance with the specific directions issued in the assessee's own case. Since one of the essential conditions for revision was absent, the revisional jurisdiction could not be exercised.

Conclusion: The revisional authority had no jurisdiction to revise the assessments, and the Tribunal was right in setting aside the revision orders.

---