Suo motu revision requires a demonstrable assessment error, not merely a preferred higher turnover view.

Revisional power under Section 82 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could not be exercised merely because the revisional authority preferred a higher turnover view. The assessing authority had already rejected the declared jute rate, adopted market price, and completed assessment on a higher turnover, which the dealer accepted and paid. For suo motu revision, the authority had to identify a specific error in the assessment order on relevant material, not just show possible revenue prejudice. As no cogent material or error in the original assessment was demonstrated, the Gauhati HC held the revisional order unsustainable and quashed the reassessment and demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional authority could invoke suo motu revision under Section 82 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and direct fresh assessment on a higher turnover without demonstrating that the original assessment was erroneous on the basis of relevant material.

Analysis: The assessment had already been made on a higher turnover by the primary authority after rejecting the declared rate of jute and adopting market price, and the dealer had accepted the assessment and paid tax. For exercising revisional power, it was necessary to show not only prejudice to the revenue but also that the assessment order was erroneous. The revisional order did not identify any error in the primary assessment, did not state that the market price adopted by the assessing authority was wrong, and rested only on a different view of the turnover reflected at check-gates. In the absence of cogent material showing error in the assessed turnover, the revisional jurisdiction could not be invoked merely because a higher turnover was thought preferable.

Conclusion: The suo motu revisional order under Section 82 was unsustainable and was quashed, along with the consequential reassessment and demand.

---