Rectification cannot cure debatable classification disputes under trade tax law when the issue is not an apparent record error.

Rectification under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act is confined to mistakes apparent from the record, meaning errors that are obvious, patent and identifiable without detailed reasoning or investigation. A disputed classification issue over whether insulating varnish and thinner fell within "paints and varnishes" or constituted an "adhesive" was debatable and involved competing views on tax treatment, so it could not be corrected through rectification. An earlier decision treating the goods under a particular entry did not make the controversy an apparent mistake. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether rectification under section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act could be used to alter the assessment on the basis of a debatable question as to whether insulating varnish and thinner fell under "paints and varnishes" or constituted an "adhesive".

Analysis: Section 22 permits correction only of a mistake apparent from the record. A mistake of that kind must be obvious, patent, and capable of being seen without elaborate argument or investigation. Where the issue depends on competing views about classification and different tax rates, it is debatable and falls outside the rectification power. The existence of an earlier decision treating the goods as taxable under a particular entry did not convert the controversy into an apparent mistake.

Conclusion: The rectification order under section 22 was not sustainable, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---