Revisional power under sales tax law can reach assessments made to implement appellate directions if they are erroneous and revenue-prejudicial.

The Commissioner's revisional power under section 36(1) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 is supervisory in nature and extends to any assessment order that is erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. That power is not excluded merely because the assessment was made in compliance with directions of the appellate authority, since the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals) is only an authority assisting the Commissioner and not a tribunal or court. Rule 7(iii-a) was treated as procedural and consistent with the statutory scheme. Accordingly, the challenge to the revision notice failed and the notice was held to be within jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show-cause notice initiating revision under section 36(1) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 was without jurisdiction on the ground that the assessment orders had been passed in compliance with the appellate authority's directions and had attained finality.

Analysis: Section 36(1) empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine records of any proceeding under the Act and revise an order if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The provision is supervisory in nature and is not confined to cases of arithmetical or factual mistake. The statutory scheme shows that the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals) is an authority appointed to assist the Commissioner under section 3(5) and is neither a Tribunal nor a court. The language of section 36(1) and section 36(3), read with the Explanation to section 36(1), is wide enough to permit revision of an assessment order even where the assessment was made in consequence of an appellate order, so long as the order sought to be revised is otherwise within the revisional ambit of the Act. The Court also treated clause (iii-a) of rule 7 of the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993 as procedural in nature and consistent with the statutory scheme.

Conclusion: The revision notice was not without jurisdiction, and the challenge to it failed.

Final Conclusion: The revisional power under section 36(1) could be invoked against the impugned assessment orders, including where they were made to give effect to an appellate order, because the statutory conditions of error and prejudice to revenue were satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi: The Commissioner's suo motu revisional power extends to any assessment order under the Act that is erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue, and it is not barred merely because the assessment was made in compliance with an appellate order of an authority subordinate to the Commissioner.

---