Revision during pending appeal barred by statutory hierarchy; appellate time excluded from limitation in sales tax proceedings.

Where an appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Tribunal, the revisional authority cannot act on the same matter in a manner inconsistent with section 20(2-A), because the statutory hierarchy requires deference to the appellate forum. If revision is initiated after the Tribunal's decision, the period spent in the appellate proceedings is excluded for limitation under section 20(3), as the Revenue cannot be prejudiced by the pendency of an appeal that the statute itself recognises. The practical effect is that revision is held in abeyance during the appeal, and orders passed contrary to this framework are liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether, when an appeal was pending before the State Sales Tax Tribunal, the sales tax authorities could exercise revisional power and whether the time spent before the Tribunal had to be excluded for limitation purposes if revision was initiated after the Tribunal's decision.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under section 20(2-A) bars revision on a matter already subject to appellate determination, and the hierarchy of authorities requires the revisional authority to act consistently with the superior appellate forum. In the situation where an assessee seeks that revision be kept in abeyance until the Tribunal disposes of the appeal, the period consumed in that appellate process cannot be counted against the Revenue for limitation under section 20(3), because the statute's mandate and the principles of judicial discipline prevent the revisional remedy from being defeated by the pendency of the appeal.

Conclusion: The revisional power could not be exercised while the appeal remained pending in a manner inconsistent with section 20(2-A), and the time spent before the Tribunal was not to be counted for limitation under section 20(3); the impugned orders were therefore liable to be set aside.

---