Rectification limited to apparent errors; Tribunal rightly refused to reopen account book rejection on merits.

Rectification under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is confined to mistakes apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to re-argue the merits or correct issues needing detailed reasoning. The Tribunal had already considered the objection concerning one ground for rejection of the account books, and the assessment was supported by multiple independent grounds. A mere difference of judicial view did not amount to an apparent error, so the rectification application was rightly rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order dismissing the rectification application under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 suffered from an error apparent on the face of the record so as to warrant interference.

Analysis: Rectification under section 22 is confined to mistakes apparent on the face of the record and does not extend to re-arguing the merits or correcting alleged errors that require long-drawn reasoning. The Tribunal had already considered the objection regarding one of the grounds on which the account books were rejected. The rejection of the account books had been upheld on multiple independent grounds, so even if one ground were open to challenge, the remaining grounds supported the assessment. A difference of judicial view on the point did not convert the issue into an apparent error capable of rectification.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order did not suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record, and the rectification application was rightly rejected.

---