Quasi-judicial tax assessment cannot be overridden by administrative disapproval; correction must follow statutory appeal or reassessment routes.

A statutory quasi-judicial assessment under the Gujarat Entertainments Tax Act could not be recalled, varied, or nullified through administrative disapproval by a superior authority. The Act was treated as a complete code, so any alleged error in the assessment had to be corrected only through the statutory appellate, revisional, or reassessment mechanisms. Executive instructions could not control or override the independent exercise of quasi-judicial discretion unless the statute expressly permitted it. On that basis, the demand founded on administrative disapproval of the completed assessment was illegal and unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether an assessment order passed by the Prescribed Officer under the Gujarat Entertainments Tax Act could be recalled or nullified on the basis of administrative disapproval by a higher authority, and whether the resulting demand for higher entertainment tax was legally sustainable.

Analysis: The assessment made by the Prescribed Officer was a statutory quasi-judicial exercise under the Act. The Act provided a complete code for assessment, reassessment, appeal, and revision, but it did not authorize the Prescribed Officer to recall his own assessment order or permit administrative interference with that order. If the assessment was believed to be erroneous, the statute required the authority to act through the prescribed appellate, revisional, or reassessment mechanisms. A mere refusal of administrative approval by a superior authority could not override or annul a completed quasi-judicial assessment, as that would amount to an unauthorized and arbitrary exercise of power. The Court also relied on the settled principle that statutory discretion vested in a quasi-judicial authority must be exercised independently and cannot be controlled by executive instructions unless the statute expressly so provides.

Conclusion: The impugned demand based on administrative disapproval of the assessment was illegal and unsustainable, and the challenge succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The tax demand at the higher rate could not stand because the assessment order had not been lawfully disturbed in the manner contemplated by the statute.

Ratio Decidendi: A quasi-judicial tax assessment made under a statute cannot be recalled, varied, or nullified on administrative approval or disapproval unless the statute expressly authorizes such interference; any correction must be made only through the statutory appeal, revision, or reassessment process.

---