Rectification for apparent tax error upheld where the assessment used the wrong rate for tamarind seed powder.

Rectification under the tax rectification provision is available only for a mistake apparent from the record, meaning an obvious error that does not call for detailed argument or further examination. Where the relevant notifications contained no specific entry for tamarind seed powder, the general tax rate applied, so the earlier assessment at 5 per cent was an obvious record error. The rectification and escaped-assessment provisions were treated as distinct but not mutually exclusive, so rectification could still be used even when the assessment order itself contained an apparent mistake. Rectification under section 17 was therefore permissible, and the challenge to the rectification orders failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority could correct the assessment under the rectification provision on the ground that the earlier assessment applied an incorrect tax rate, or whether the matter required recourse to escaped-assessment proceedings.

Analysis: The rectification provision was held to apply only where there is a mistake apparent from the record. An error is apparent when it is obvious and does not require detailed examination, re-argument, or resolution of an arguable question. On the facts, the notifications in force during the relevant periods did not contain a specific entry for tamarind seed powder, and the general rate of tax was therefore plainly applicable. The earlier assessment at 5 per cent was an obvious mistake on the record. The rectification and escaped-assessment provisions were held not to be mutually exclusive, because rectification may be used even where the assessment order itself contains an obvious error.

Conclusion: Rectification under section 17 was permissible, and the challenge to the rectification orders failed.

---