https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156263 The Karnataka High Court considered whether suo motu revisional jurisdiction under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act could be used to restore an assessment after the appellate authority accepted a revised return and set aside a best judgment assessment. It held that the discrepancies noticed by the assessing authority had been satisfactorily explained in the revised return and the reply to the revisional notice, and that the questioned turnover items were already accounted for on the record. As the appellate order disclosed no unsustainable or jurisdictional error, the Commissioner had no basis to interfere, and the order restoring the assessment could not stand. en-us Tue, 13 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:10:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156263 The Karnataka High Court considered whether suo motu revisional jurisdiction under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act could be used to restore an assessment after the appellate authority accepted a revised return and set aside a best judgment assessment. It held that the discrepancies noticed by the assessing authority had been satisfactorily explained in the revised return and the reply to the revisional notice, and that the questioned turnover items were already accounted for on the record. As the appellate order disclosed no unsustainable or jurisdictional error, the Commissioner had no basis to interfere, and the order restoring the assessment could not stand. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 13 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156263