Rectification for apparent error cannot reopen a debatable classification of copper wire rod and nickel strips as primary metal.

Rectification under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act is limited to an obvious mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen a debatable issue requiring factual inquiry. The question whether copper wire rod and nickel strips were non-primary metal was at least doubtful on the existing materials, and the Revenue produced no evidence to show that nickel strips were not in primary form. Because the issue depended on investigation rather than a patent error, initiation of rectification proceedings was not justified and the dealer succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings for rectification under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 could be initiated in respect of the treatment of copper wire rod and nickel strips as non-primary metal.

Analysis: Rectification under section 22 is confined to an obvious mistake apparent from the record and does not extend to questions requiring investigation, debate, or a choice between two possible views. The earlier assessment treated the goods as metal in primary form, and the materials on record showed that copper wire rod was covered by the earlier understanding of cast products and that nickel was imported and sold in forms described as strips, bars, and primary nickel in cathode form. The Revenue did not adduce evidence to establish that nickel strips were not in primary form. Since the question whether the goods were in primary form was at least doubtful and required factual inquiry, it could not be treated as an apparent mistake on the record.

Conclusion: The initiation of rectification proceedings under section 22 was not justified, and the dealer was entitled to succeed.

---