https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100247 Section 12(4)(b) limited the Board of Revenue's suo motu revisional power to the assessment order actually in issue before it. The Board could not treat the Deputy Commissioner's later revisional order as the operative order where the exemption point had never been raised in that revision. The doctrine of merger was not automatic or universal; it depended on the scope of the statutory revision and the subject-matter actually considered by the superior authority. Because the issue before the Board was distinct from the issue considered by the Deputy Commissioner, there was no merger of the assessment order into the revisional order, and the revision was time-barred. en-us Tue, 04 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jul 2014 12:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100247 Section 12(4)(b) limited the Board of Revenue's suo motu revisional power to the assessment order actually in issue before it. The Board could not treat the Deputy Commissioner's later revisional order as the operative order where the exemption point had never been raised in that revision. The doctrine of merger was not automatic or universal; it depended on the scope of the statutory revision and the subject-matter actually considered by the superior authority. Because the issue before the Board was distinct from the issue considered by the Deputy Commissioner, there was no merger of the assessment order into the revisional order, and the revision was time-barred. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Oct 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100247