https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161433 The Commissioner's independent suo motu revisional power under rule 80 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 was not displaced merely because the Assistant Commissioner had earlier exercised delegated revisional authority. The scheme of the Act and Rules treated the Commissioner as the supervising authority, with the Assistant Commissioner remaining a subordinate officer despite delegation. As rule 80 authorised revision of orders passed by specified subordinate authorities where revenue interests were prejudiced, the earlier subordinate revision did not exhaust or bar the Commissioner's own jurisdiction. The notice under rule 80 was therefore valid as a commencement of revision, leaving the assessee free to contest the proceedings on all available grounds. en-us Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jan 2014 16:30:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161433 The Commissioner's independent suo motu revisional power under rule 80 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 was not displaced merely because the Assistant Commissioner had earlier exercised delegated revisional authority. The scheme of the Act and Rules treated the Commissioner as the supervising authority, with the Assistant Commissioner remaining a subordinate officer despite delegation. As rule 80 authorised revision of orders passed by specified subordinate authorities where revenue interests were prejudiced, the earlier subordinate revision did not exhaust or bar the Commissioner's own jurisdiction. The notice under rule 80 was therefore valid as a commencement of revision, leaving the assessee free to contest the proceedings on all available grounds. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161433