https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159625 A delegated revisional authority's order under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be reopened by the Commissioner through a separate suo motu revisional power under rule 80 when the same revisional jurisdiction had already been exercised by the delegatee. The statutory scheme attached finality to orders passed under section 23(4), subject only to the prescribed appeal structure, and did not contemplate a second revision over the same matter. The commentary therefore treats such a reopening as beyond jurisdiction and inconsistent with the finality built into the revisional framework. en-us Mon, 31 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:25:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159625 A delegated revisional authority's order under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be reopened by the Commissioner through a separate suo motu revisional power under rule 80 when the same revisional jurisdiction had already been exercised by the delegatee. The statutory scheme attached finality to orders passed under section 23(4), subject only to the prescribed appeal structure, and did not contemplate a second revision over the same matter. The commentary therefore treats such a reopening as beyond jurisdiction and inconsistent with the finality built into the revisional framework. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 31 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159625