Revision jurisdiction under tax law does not require prior notice where hearing safeguards operate as natural justice protection.

Section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 empowers the Commissioner to revise an Income-tax Officer's order if it is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and making any enquiry considered necessary. The notice requirement under section 34 is not imported into section 33B as a jurisdictional condition. The hearing obligation operates as part of natural justice and may affect the legality of the final order, but it does not restrict the Commissioner's power to initiate proceedings. Accordingly, prior notice was not a condition precedent to jurisdiction, and the notice issued did not invalidate the revision proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether a notice was a condition precedent to the Commissioner's jurisdiction under section 33B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and whether the notice issued in the case invalidated the exercise of that jurisdiction.

Analysis: Section 33B empowers the Commissioner to examine the record and, if the order of the Income-tax Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, to act after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making such enquiry as he deems necessary. Unlike section 34, section 33B does not prescribe service of a notice as a jurisdictional requirement. The requirement of hearing belongs to the sphere of natural justice and may affect the legality of the eventual order, but it does not control the Commissioner's authority to commence proceedings under section 33B.

Conclusion: No notice was required before the Commissioner assumed jurisdiction under section 33B, and the notice issued did not invalidate the proceedings. The jurisdiction was validly exercised.

---