https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158984 In revisional jurisdiction under section 34 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, interference must rest on materials already on the record before the appellate authority. The revisional authority could not rely on reports obtained after the appellate order or on evidence collected behind the assessee's back to conclude that the assessee was a dealer in groundnut. Since the revision was founded on later-collected extraneous material rather than the existing record, the revisional order was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 26 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:12:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158984 In revisional jurisdiction under section 34 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, interference must rest on materials already on the record before the appellate authority. The revisional authority could not rely on reports obtained after the appellate order or on evidence collected behind the assessee's back to conclude that the assessee was a dealer in groundnut. Since the revision was founded on later-collected extraneous material rather than the existing record, the revisional order was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 26 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158984