Revisional interference with remand order refused where notice, limitation, and jurisdiction objections could still be examined after remand.

In revisional jurisdiction, interference with a remand order was unwarranted because the objections to notice validity, jurisdiction, and limitation could still be examined by the assessing authority after remand. The limitation objection turned on factual matters, including service of the remand order and exclusion of any stay period, and therefore did not require determination at the revisional stage. A mere wrong mention of a statutory provision does not vitiate an action when it is otherwise traceable to a valid provision, subject to the recognised penal exception where notice is absent under the provision under which penalty is proposed. On these facts, the remand caused no prejudice and no question of law arose for interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional court should interfere with the order remanding the reassessment matter and whether the objections regarding validity of notice, limitation, and wrong mention of provision required adjudication at this stage.

Analysis: The validity of the notice and the plea of jurisdiction could be raised before the assessing authority pursuant to remand and did not require determination in revisional jurisdiction at that stage. The plea of limitation depended upon factual questions, including service of the remand order and exclusion of any stay period, and therefore also could be considered by the assessing authority. A mere mention of a wrong provision does not invalidate an action when the action is otherwise traceable to a valid statutory provision, though an exception may arise in penal matters where notice is absent under the provision under which penalty is proposed to be levied. On these facts, the remand caused no prejudice and no question of law arose for interference.

Conclusion: The order of remand was upheld and the revision was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: In revisional jurisdiction, the court need not interfere with a remand order when the objections of invalid notice, jurisdiction, and limitation can still be examined by the assessing authority, and mere wrong mention of a statutory provision does not vitiate an otherwise valid action unless the case falls within the recognised penal exception.

---