https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8263 Section 34 revisional jurisdiction under the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 was treated as a quasi-judicial power that must be exercised when the statutory conditions are satisfied and no appeal is pending. The Commissioner could not refuse to entertain a revision petition on the ground that the assessee had not pursued the appellate remedy, because the word "may" was read as imposing a duty to consider and dispose of the revision according to law, not as authorising an arbitrary or mechanical refusal. The refusal to entertain the revision was therefore unlawful, and the matter was remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 22 Jun 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8263 Section 34 revisional jurisdiction under the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1955 was treated as a quasi-judicial power that must be exercised when the statutory conditions are satisfied and no appeal is pending. The Commissioner could not refuse to entertain a revision petition on the ground that the assessee had not pursued the appellate remedy, because the word "may" was read as imposing a duty to consider and dispose of the revision according to law, not as authorising an arbitrary or mechanical refusal. The refusal to entertain the revision was therefore unlawful, and the matter was remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jun 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8263