Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Board of Revenue could exercise suo motu revisional power under Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 against the part of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order favourable to the Revenue when the assessee had already appealed to the Appellate Tribunal against the adverse part of the same order.
Analysis: Section 34 imposed a bar on revisional interference where the order had been made the subject-matter of an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. Section 36 empowered the Tribunal, in an appeal by the assessee, to deal with the entire appellate order and even to enhance the assessment or penalty after hearing the assessee. On that scheme, once the assessee carried the order before the Tribunal, the whole order came within the Tribunal's seisin and could not be split up for parallel revisional examination by the Board of Revenue. Piecemeal scrutiny of different parts of the same order by different authorities was inconsistent with the statutory scheme.
Conclusion: The Board of Revenue had no jurisdiction to revise the remaining part of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order once that order was appealed to the Tribunal by the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: When an appellate order is carried to the statutory appellate tribunal by the aggrieved assessee, the entire order becomes subject to the tribunal's jurisdiction and the revisional authority is barred from undertaking separate scrutiny of any part of that same order.