The main legal point established is that the jurisdiction under S.15(1)(i) of the General Sales Tax Act is distinct from that under R.33, with the former addressing illegality or impropriety in the assessment order and the latter dealing with assessment of escaped turnover.

1. These two appeals by certificate from the judgment of the Kerala High Court involve a common question of law and will stand disposed of by this judgment.

2. The facts in C. A. 804 of 1967 may alone be stated. The respondent was assessed under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 (Act 11 of 1125) (State of Kerala), hereinafter called the "Act", for the year 1958-59 by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, First Circle, Alleppey, by his order dated November 13, 1959. Subsequently the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income tax and Sales Tax, South Zone, Quilon issued a notice dated October 29, 1963 to the respondent under S.15 (1) (i) of the Act proposing to revise the assessment on the ground that the assessing authority had committed a mistake in computing the assessable turnover to the extent of Rs. 17,000. In response to the notice the respondent submitted the objections on November 2,1963. His contention, inter alia, was that the Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to proceed in the matter under S.15 (1) (i) and he could proceed only under R.33 of the General Sales Tax R.1950. It was also contended that for the aforesaid reason the proceedings proposed by the Deputy Commissioner were barred by limitation under that rule. The Deputy Commissioner overruled these contentions and revised the assessment by including an additional turnover of Rs. 17,994/-. The respondent took the matter in appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum. The Tribunal held that R.33 did not apply as it was not a case of escapement of turnover but it was a case of illegal and improper exemption having been granted by the assessing authority to which S.15 (1) (i) of the Act was applicable. The respondent filed a tax revision petition before the High Court which was allowed by the High Court following a decision given by it in Ninan v. State of Kerala. (1965 KLT.1167).

3. In order to decide the points which have been raised before us it is necessary to refer to the statutory provisions and the Rules made under the Act. The definition of "assessing authority" and "Deputy Commissioner" is contained in S.2, clauses (b) and (cc) respectively. "Turnover" is defined by cl. (k) to mean "aggregate amount for which goods are either bought or sold by a dealer whether for cash or for deferred payment or other valuable consideration..." S.2-A gives the constitution and functions of the Appellate Tribunal. Under S.12 every dealer whose turnover is Rs. 10,000/-or more in a year has to submit a return in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed to the assessing authority. The assessment has to be made by that authority. S.14 provides for an appeal against the assessment made on a dealer. Every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Authority has been, declared to be final subject to the provisions of S.15 to 15C. S.15 of the Act provides for authorities competent to revise the orders. Sub-section (1) of that section reads:

"15. (1) The Deputy Commissioner may- (i) suo motu, or (ii) on application, call for and examine the record of any order passed or proceeding recorded under the provisions of this Act by any officer subordinate to him, for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of such order, or as to the regularity of such proceeding, and may pass such order with respect thereto as he thinks fit:

Provided that the Deputy Commissioner shall not revise any order or proceeding' under this sub-section if

(a) where an appeal against the order or proceeding lies to the Appellate Tribunal, the time within which such appeal may be made has not expired, or

(b) the order or proceeding has been made the subject of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal." The Board of Revenue has also been given similar powers and can revise suo motu or otherwise any order passed or proceeding recorded by the Deputy Commissioner under sub-S.(1). It is unnecessary to refer to the proviso to sub-S.(2) relating to the powers of the Board of Rev