Rectification of assessment requires a clear apparent error; share income issue did not justify correction on settled precedent.

Rectification of assessments is confined to errors apparent on the face of the record. On the facts described, treating share income as part of the assessee's individual income did not disclose any apparent mistake justifying rectification, because the issue had already been settled by binding precedent on similar facts. The Tribunal was therefore correct in refusing rectification, and no basis remained for directing a reference in favour of the assessee; the result was against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that no mistake apparent from the record existed so as to justify rectification of the assessments by including the share income in the assessee's individual income.

Analysis: The controversy turned on the settled principle that rectification can be invoked only where an error is apparent on the face of the record. On facts similar to the present case, the Court had already held that the attempt to treat the firm income as convertible into Hindu undivided family property did not disclose any such apparent mistake warranting rectification. Since the legal question stood concluded by binding precedent, no basis remained for directing a reference in favour of the assessee.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was correct in holding that there was no mistake apparent from the record requiring rectification, and the answer is against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

---