Revisional power cannot be used to redo assessment itself; cancellation must be followed by remand for fresh assessment.

Under Section 63A of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, the revisional authority may cancel an assessment and direct a fresh assessment, but it cannot itself assume the role of the Assessing Officer and pass a fresh reassessment order. The amended wording, read with the earlier pari materia interpretation, was taken to link cancellation of the assessment with a remand for fresh assessment by the assessing officer, not a de novo reassessment by the revisional authority. As the impugned revisional direction exceeded jurisdiction, the writ petitions could not be rejected merely on alternate remedy grounds.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after cancelling the assessment under the revisional power, the Joint Commissioner under Section 63A of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could himself proceed to pass a fresh reassessment order, or was confined to directing the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment.

Analysis: The revisional provision empowered the authority to examine an erroneous order prejudicial to revenue and to pass such order as the circumstances justified, including enhancing, modifying, cancelling the assessment and directing a fresh assessment. The Court read the amended language, especially the substitution of "or" by "and", as making it clear that cancellation of the assessment and direction for fresh assessment are linked steps. Relying on the earlier Division Bench view under the pari materia provision of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, the Court held that the revisional authority cannot step into the shoes of the assessing authority and redo the assessment itself. Once the assessment order is set aside, the proper course is to remit the matter for fresh assessment by the assessing officer. Since the impugned part of the revisional order was without jurisdiction, dismissal of the writ petitions on alternate remedy was not justified.

Conclusion: The revisional authority had no jurisdiction to pass the fresh reassessment order after cancelling the assessment and could only have directed a fresh assessment by the assessing officer.

---