ORDER U.L. Bhat, C.J. 1. These references have been made by the Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee under Section 44(1) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The common question reference to the High Court is as follows :- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner was within his jurisdiction in initiating action by issuing a notice under Section 38(5)(a) of State Act read with appropriate section of Central Sales Tax Act and Turnover Tax Act specially in view of the fact that the material on the basis of which enhancement is to be made, was collected after the passing of the assessment order." 2. The assessee is a trading concern engaged in the business of purchase and sale of oil seeds, cotton seeds, foodgrain, pulses, etc. and the references relate to assessment year 14-11-1974 to 3-11-1975. On 26-3-1971, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Khandwa passed three separate orders under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and under the M. P. Turnover Tax Act, 1976. The assessee preferred appeals against these orders before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. Meanwhile, on 28-3-1977, the flying squad of the Sales Tax Department inspected the premises of the assessee and seized certain books and forwarded a report dated 25-6-1977 to the assessing authority pointing out various irregularities in the accounts maintained for the period from 1973 to 1977. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner who had an opportunity to peruse a copy of the report, issued a notice to the assessee for enhancement under Section 38(5)(a) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The assessee appeared before the Appellate Authority and stated that there are no irregularities in the. account books and all transactions in the seized books are reflected in the regular books produced before the authority and if the assessee is given an opportunity, the regularity of books can be proved. The Appellate Authority thereupon set aside the assessment orders and remanded the case back to the assessing authority for fresh disposal. These orders were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal which has dismissed the appeals. Hence these references. 3. The Appellate Authority thereupon set aside the assessment orders and remanded the case back to the assessing authority for fresh disposal. These orders were challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal which has dismissed the appeals. Hence these references. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee contended that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to initiate action by issuing notice under Section 38(5)(a) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act and the parallel provisions of the other Acts, in view of the fact that the material on the basis of which notice was issued was collected after the passing of the assessment order.. 4. Section 38 deals with appeal by a dealer or person objecting to the original order of assessment passed under Section 18 with or without penalty or to the order of reassessment under Section 19 or Section 19-A with or without penalty or to the original order imposing penalty or relating to refund under Section 24 or any order passed under Section 45. Any dealer or person aggrieved by the appellate order can file an appeal before the Tribunal. Sub-section (5) of Section 38 deals with the power of the appellate authority. According to clause (a) of sub-section (5), the appellate authority may - "confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment or the penalty or both." Thus, it is clear that even in an appeal preferred by the assessee, the appellate authority has jurisdiction to enhance the assessment or penalty. Rule 60 of the Rules framed under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act requires notice in form XXVIII to be given to any person in appeal against whom an order is passed enhancing assessment or penalty or both and to give him a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The procedural requirement has also been followed in the present case. 5. The new material before the appellate authority was the report of the flying squad which had occasion to seize account books of the assessee and compare them with the books produced before the assessing authority. The flying squad noted certain irregularities. The new material was not before the assessing authority. That was because the account books seized by the flying squad and which were with the assessee all along were not produced before the assessing authority. The flying squad noted certain irregularities. The new material was not before the assessing authority. That was because the account books seized by the flying squad and which were with the assessee all along were not produced before the assessing authority. The jurisdiction of the appellate authority is not always restricted to consideration of the materials available before the original authority. In appropriate cases, the appellate authority can look into new or additional materials placed before it either by the assessee or by the department. Such appellate authority would be acting within its jurisdiction in enhancing the assessment, relying on the material originally available to the assessing authority or new or additional material made available to the appellate authority. We are unable to find in any provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder any curtailment of this ordinary and normal jurisdiction of an appellate authority. 6. Learned counsel for the assessee referred us to Section 29 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act which prescribes power to require production of accounts and documents and to inspect, search and seize books of accounts, documents and goods. Sub-section (7) empowers the Commissioner to serve upon the dealer a notice in writing to show cause as to why penalty equal to double the amount of tax payable be not imposed on him for the dealer's default in not making entries in respect of such goods in his books of account or registers or other documents, as the case may be, maintained by him in the course of his business. Under sub-section (8), after following the procedure prescribed, it is open to the Commissioner to impose penalty. Assuming that in the present case the Commissioner could have invoked Section 29(7) of the Act, that is no reason to hold that the appellate authority has no jurisdiction to look into the report of the flying squad or take note of the alleged irregularities referred to therein. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Food Corporation of India v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, 54 STC Page 332. In that case, the assessee filed an appeal against the- assessment order. The original authority had not levied penalty. The Deputy Commissioner in appeal imposed penalty on the assessee. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Food Corporation of India v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, 54 STC Page 332. In that case, the assessee filed an appeal against the- assessment order. The original authority had not levied penalty. The Deputy Commissioner in appeal imposed penalty on the assessee. This Court held that while he has power to enhance the penalty imposed by the assessing authority, he had no jurisdiction to impose penalty for the first time. This decision is of no assistance to the assessee and does not have any bearing on the question or controversy in this case. 7. We hold that the appellate authority has jurisdiction to look into the new or additional material placed before it by the assessee or the department and issue notice for enhancement of the assessment under Section 38(5)(a) of the Act. The question referred is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. 8. A copy of this order under the signature of the Registrar and seal of the High Court shall be transmitted to the Appellate Tribunal.