Rectification limited to apparent errors on record; factual dispute over concessional tax treatment had to go in appeal.

Rectification under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was confined to mistakes apparent from the record, so a disputed issue requiring factual inquiry could not be corrected in that proceeding. The assessment turned on whether the assessee sold mineral turpentine oil to a textile manufacturer and was therefore not entitled to concessional treatment under Form XVII, a question that depended on evidence and factual adjudication. As the alleged error was not manifest on the face of the record, rectification was properly refused and the factual challenge had to be pursued before the appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for rectification under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, on the ground that there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record, was justified.

Analysis: Rectification is permissible only when the error is manifest from the record. The legal position recognised that a subsequent declaration of law may show an apparent error, but the present dispute turned on whether the assessment order rested on a factual finding that the petitioner sold mineral turpentine oil to a textile manufacturer and was therefore not entitled to concessional treatment on the basis of Form XVII declaration. That controversy required factual adjudication and production of records, which could not be undertaken in rectification proceedings. The proper forum for such factual challenge was the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The rejection of rectification was upheld and the challenge failed.

---