https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159947 The revisional order was upheld because the record did not show any prior effective revision that would make it a second revision, and the materials relied on were treated as internal correspondence rather than a concluded order. Limitation was not a bar where the revisional order was passed within the prescribed period and service followed within a reasonable time thereafter; a delay of about five weeks in service was not treated as fatal. Revisional interference was also justified because the appellate order, despite being in the nature of a remand, tended to grant exemption contrary to the Government's clarification, thereby prejudicially affecting the revenue and attracting revisional power. en-us Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Dec 2013 18:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159947 The revisional order was upheld because the record did not show any prior effective revision that would make it a second revision, and the materials relied on were treated as internal correspondence rather than a concluded order. Limitation was not a bar where the revisional order was passed within the prescribed period and service followed within a reasonable time thereafter; a delay of about five weeks in service was not treated as fatal. Revisional interference was also justified because the appellate order, despite being in the nature of a remand, tended to grant exemption contrary to the Government's clarification, thereby prejudicially affecting the revenue and attracting revisional power. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159947