JUDGMENT : G.K. Misra, C.J. - The Assessee filed revisions against the orders imposing penalty u/s 46(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, for non-payment of tax. These revisions were disposed of on 30-1-1964 u/s 33-A(2) without hearing the Assessees. The Assessee accordingly filed a review application asking for the hearing of the revisions in his presence. The review application was disposed of on 23-11-1964 after living a hearing to the Assessee on the question whether he was entitled to bearing in the revisions. The Commissioner of Income Tax, following the Sugnn Chand Sarogi v. Commissioner of Income Tax 53 J.T.R. 717 held that the order to be passed u/s 33-A (2) is an administrative order and the Assessee was not entitled to any bearing. This writ application has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing the aforesaid orders passed on 30-1-1964 and 23-11-1964, refusing to give the Assessee an opportunity of being heard in the revisions. 2. There was some controversy with regard to the right of the Assessee to be heard at, the revisional stage. The matter is concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in Dwarka Nath v. Income Tax Officer Special Oircle 57 J.T.R. 349 where their Lordships expressed the view that an order assailed before the Commissioner in exercise of revisional jurisdiction u/s 33-A(2) affects the rights of the Assessee and the jurisdiction conferred under that section is a judicial one. In that view of the matter, the Assessee is entitled to a bearing in revision. 3. In view of the Supreme Court decision we quash the orders dated 30-1-1964 and 23-11-1964 and issue a writ of mandamus commanding the Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar and Orissa to bear the Assessee in the revisions. The writ application is allowed, but in the circumstances there will be no order as to costs. R.N. Misra, J. 4. I agree. Final Result : Allowed