Revisional proceedings limitation starts when notice is decided, not when it is served, and the notice here was timely.

Proviso (a) to Section 49(3) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 bars revisional proceedings after three calendar years from the order sought to be revised. For this purpose, "initiate" means the point when the revisional authority applies its mind to the material and decides to issue notice under Rule 61 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Rules, 2006; later service of notice is only a subsequent step. Applying that construction, a notice issued on 26-12-2016 in relation to an order dated 29-7-2013 was within time, so the revisional proceeding was validly initiated and the notice was not without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings under Section 49(3) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 were initiated within the prescribed period of three calendar years from the date of the order sought to be revised, and whether the notice issued by the Commissioner was without jurisdiction.

Analysis: Proviso (a) to Section 49(3) bars initiation of revisional proceedings after three calendar years from the order sought to be revised. The expression "initiate" was construed to mean the point at which the revisional authority applies its mind to the material and decides to issue notice under Rule 61 of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Rules, 2006. Service of notice on the assessee is only a subsequent step and does not determine initiation. On the facts, the Commissioner had issued notice on 26-12-2016 in relation to an order dated 29-7-2013, which fell within the prescribed period.

Conclusion: The revisional proceeding was validly initiated within time and the notice was not without jurisdiction.

---