Strict construction of tax statute bars suo motu revision where appellate order has attained finality.

Section 47(2) of the M.P. Value Added Tax Act was examined alongside Sections 3, 3A and 46, and the Court read the scheme to mean that the earlier reference to the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal) in Section 3 had been omitted, while Section 3A separately established the Appellate Authority. On that reading, no further appeal or revision lay from the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal)'s order, which had attained finality. The Court also reiterated that a taxing statute must be construed strictly according to its language. On this basis, the impugned order was held not amenable to suo motu revision under Section 47(2).

---

---

Issues: Whether the order passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal) was amenable to suo motu revision under Section 47(2) of the M.P. Value Added Tax Act.

Analysis: After examining the scheme of Sections 3, 3A, 46 and 47 of the M.P. Value Added Tax Act, the Court held that clause (b) of Section 3, which earlier referred to the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal), had been omitted by amendment and that Section 3A separately provided for the Appellate Authority. Reading the provisions together, the Court found that no further appeal or revision lay from the order of the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal), and that such order had attained finality. The Court also reiterated that a taxing statute must be construed strictly according to its words.

Conclusion: The impugned order of the Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Appeal) was not amenable to suo motu revision under Section 47(2) of the M.P. Value Added Tax Act, and the challenge to the notice and revisional order succeeded.

---