Statutory first appeal cannot be nullified by revision where merits review must remain available to the assessee.

The Karnataka High Court held that a revisional order under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was legally flawed where it set aside the first appellate order without restoring the assessee's effective statutory first appeal under Section 20. Because the first appellate authority was itself barred from remanding the matter to the assessing authority, the revisional course deprived the assessee of a merits-based first appeal. The order was therefore interfered with and modified, and the matter was remanded to the first appellate authority for fresh disposal by that authority itself, without further remand to the assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional order setting aside the first appellate order was unsustainable because it effectively deprived the assessee of the statutory first appeal and whether the matter ought to be remitted to the first appellate authority for fresh disposal.

Analysis: The appeals arose under Section 24 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 and challenged the exercise of suo motu revisional power under Section 22A of the Act. The revisional order set aside the first appellate order but did not restore the assessee to a position where the appeal could be decided on merits by the appellate authority. The result was that the assessee was left without the effective benefit of the statutory first appellate remedy under Section 20 of the Act. Since the first appellate authority was under a statutory bar against remanding the matter to the assessing authority, the course adopted in the revisional order was legally flawed.

Conclusion: The revisional order was interfered with and modified to the extent that the matter was remanded to the first appellate authority for fresh disposal by that authority itself, without remand to the assessing authority.

---