Judgment :- Mohammed, J. This Tax Revision Case is filed against the order of the Kerala Sales Tax appellate Tribunal, Addl. Bench, Kozhikode in T.A.No.181 of 1991 dt.4thSeptember 1991. The assessment year involved in this revision is 1984-85 and the assessment is one under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act. This revision has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Law), Board of Revenue (Taxes), Ernakulam and respondent is the assessee. 2. The assessee filed the return under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act for the year 1984-85 and the final assessment for the said year was completed as per the assessment order dt. 10.3.1989 fixing the total and taxable turnover of Rs. 3,30,360.08 and 3,25,740/- respectively. The above final assessment was based on the turnover disclosed as per the monthly returns. In relation to the provisional assessment for the first six months of the year 1984-85 there were appeals before the Sales Tax appellate Tribunal as T. A. Nos. 21 to 26 of 1986. The State filed Tax Revision Cases against the said order as T.R.C. Nos. 9 to 14 of 1987. The above revisions were disposed of by this Court as per the order dt. 25.1.1989. There after the final assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the turnover fixed by the appellate Assistant Commissioner. Subsequently, the assessing authority noticed that a turnover of Rs. 18,30,520/- had been escaped assessment during the year 1984-85. Therefore, a pre-assessment notice was issued under S.19 of the K.G.S.T. Act on 16.6.1989 seeking to assess the escaped turnover. The assessee objected the notice contending that the proceedings initiated for assessing the escaped turnover is time barred. Finally, the officer as per the assessment order dt. 2.8.1989 completed the assessment as proposed in the notice. The objection raised by the assessee that the assessment was time barred was not countenanced by the assessing authority. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the appellate Assistant Commissioner. However, the appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the order levying tax on escaped turnover. As against the said order, the assessee filed a further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the order dt. 4th Sep. 1991 declared that the revised Central Sales Tax assessment made on the assessee for the year 1984-85 under S.19(1) was a time-barred assessment. However, the appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the order levying tax on escaped turnover. As against the said order, the assessee filed a further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the order dt. 4th Sep. 1991 declared that the revised Central Sales Tax assessment made on the assessee for the year 1984-85 under S.19(1) was a time-barred assessment. It is against the said order, the Department filed the present Tax Revision Case. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the State and the counsel for the assessee-respondent. 4. The only point which requires to be decided in this revision is whether the revised Central Sales Tax assessment order in the case of the assessee for the year 1984-85 passed on 2.8.1989 was barred by time. The period of limitation provided under S.19(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act 1963 would apply in the case of an assessment under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act. S.19(1) of the Act provides that where for any reason the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer has escaped assessment to tax in any year, the assessing authority may, at any time within four years from the expiry of the year to which the tax relates, proceed to determine to the best of its judgment the turnover which has escaped assessment to tax and assess the tax accordingly. As pointed out earlier, the original assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act for the year 1984-85 had been originally completed on 10.3.1989. In order to assess the escaped turnover for the said year the assessing authority has to proceed to determine such turnover within a period of four years from the last date of the assessment year to which the tax relates. The tax in this case relates to the period from 1.4.1984 to 31.3.1985. The notice under S.19(1) of the Act was issued on 16.6.1989 which was served on the assessee on 4.7.1989. The period provided for issuing notice under S.19(1) had already been expired on 31.3.1989. Sub-s.(3) of S.19 authorises the assessing authority to exercise the power under Sub-s.(1) not with standing the pendency of appeal or revision against the original order of assessment. That would indicate the period of limitation provided for the issue of notice to assess the escaped turnover under sub-s.(1) is absolute and unqualified. Sub-s.(3) of S.19 authorises the assessing authority to exercise the power under Sub-s.(1) not with standing the pendency of appeal or revision against the original order of assessment. That would indicate the period of limitation provided for the issue of notice to assess the escaped turnover under sub-s.(1) is absolute and unqualified. Even the pendency of the provisional monthly assessment or appeal or revision therefrom will not save the situation. The assessment on escaped turnover under S.19 stands by itself independent of other provisions in the Act. The plea under sub-s.(4) of S.19hasnotbeenestablishedasfoundbythe Tribunal. It is therefore, crystalline that the proceeding initiated by the assessing authority for assessment of the escaped turnover under S.19(1) is barred by limitation. Consequently, the revised assessment order for the year 1984-85 is clearly invalid. 5. The Tribunal has in detail considered the question on facts and in view of the relevant provision of the Act. We do not see any error of law or of facts in the order passed by the Tribunal. 6. In view of the discussion herein above, the Tax Revision Case is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.