Rectification limited to apparent errors cannot reopen unraised issues or rely on later precedent.

Rectification under section 55(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is confined to errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to raise a new contention that was neither argued nor considered in the original proceedings. The Madras HC noted that no patent mistake existed where the tribunal had not been asked to examine whether any turnover represented sales in the course of import, and a later Supreme Court decision could not retrospectively create an apparent error. The refusal to rectify was therefore sustained, leaving the Revenue's position undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal could rectify its earlier order under section 55(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, on the basis of a contention that was not raised before it and on the strength of a subsequent decision of the Supreme Court.

Analysis: Section 55(1) empowers rectification only where there is an error apparent on the face of the record. Such an error can arise only from a matter actually placed before the authority and decided by it, and not from a point that was never argued or considered. The Tribunal was under no obligation to investigate, on its own, whether any part of the turnover represented sales in the course of import, when that issue was not mooted before it and the later decision relied upon was unavailable when the original order was made. On those facts, no apparent error existed in the record.

Conclusion: The refusal to rectify was and the challenge failed; the decision was in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: Rectification cannot be used to introduce a new contention based on a later precedent where the original order contains no patent mistake on the issues actually decided.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification under a power limited to errors apparent on the face of the record is unavailable for issues never raised or decided, and a subsequent judgment cannot create such an error retrospectively.

---