Revisional power under the Gift Tax Act cannot be used when the assessment was made after due consideration of relevant material.

Revisional jurisdiction under section 24(2) of the Gift Tax Act cannot be invoked unless the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Where the Gift-tax Officer had verified the passport and considered the relevant material before holding the assessee to be a non-resident, the assessment reflected due application of mind and could not be revised merely because another view was possible. The revisional authority identified no specific error or prejudice, so the revision was unjustified and the assessment was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional authority was justified in invoking revisional jurisdiction under section 24(2) of the Gift Tax Act on the ground that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

Analysis: The assessment order showed that the Gift-tax Officer had verified the passport and considered the relevant material before concluding that the assessee was a non-resident. The revisional authority did not point to any specific error in the assessment order or explain how it caused prejudice to the Revenue. Where the assessing authority has applied its mind to the relevant facts, revision cannot be sustained merely on a different view of the matter.

Conclusion: The invocation of revisional jurisdiction was unjustified and the revisional order was liable to be quashed; the assessment made by the Gift-tax Officer stood restored.

Ratio Decidendi: Revisional power cannot be exercised unless the assessment order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, and an order made after due consideration of the relevant material is not amenable to revision merely because a different view is possible.

---