Revisional remedy against assessment orders remains available where the statute expressly permits it despite an appellate option.

A revision under section 16 of the Andhra Pradesh Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1987 was held maintainable against an assessment order even though an appeal was available under section 15(1). The statute was read as creating distinct appellate and revisional remedies, and the taxpayer was entitled to elect either route. The revisional authority could not refuse to examine the revision merely because an alternative remedy existed; it was required to consider the matter on merits, including regularity, correctness, legality, and propriety of the assessment proceedings. The order declining to entertain the revision was therefore set aside and the revision was directed to be decided afresh in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision under section 16 of the Andhra Pradesh Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employments Act, 1987 was maintainable against the assessment order notwithstanding the availability of an appeal under section 15(1) of the Act, and whether the revisional authority could reject the revision solely on the ground of alternative remedy.

Analysis: Section 15(1) provides an appellate remedy against orders passed under the Act, except an order under section 8(3). Section 16 separately confers revisional jurisdiction on the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of the assessing authority or appellate authority to satisfy himself about the regularity, correctness, legality, or propriety of the proceedings or decision. On a plain reading, the statute permits a revision even against an assessment order. The existence of an appellate remedy did not justify dismissal of the revision without examining it on merits, since the petitioner was entitled to elect either remedy.

Conclusion: The revision was maintainable and had to be decided on merits. The revisional authority's refusal to entertain it on the ground of alternative remedy was unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside with a direction to dispose of the revision afresh in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal statute expressly confers revisional jurisdiction over assessment orders, the revisional authority cannot decline to exercise that jurisdiction merely because an appellate remedy is also available.

---