Rectification for mistake apparent from record is unavailable where manufacture status and rebate eligibility need factual inquiry and competing views.

Rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act is limited to an obvious, patent and self-evident mistake and cannot be used where the issue depends on detailed fact-finding or competing legal interpretations. The assessee's claim that its piling operations amounted to manufacture or processing, and that it was wholly or mainly engaged in such activity for rebate purposes under the Finance Act, 1964, required examination of the business facts and was open to more than one view. No mistake apparent from the record was shown, so rectification was not permissible and the matter was decided against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's claim for rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the footing that it was wholly or mainly engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods so as to attract the rebate under the Finance Act, 1964, disclosed a mistake apparent from the record.

Analysis: Rectification under section 154 is confined to an obvious, patent and self-evident mistake and cannot rest on a point requiring detailed investigation of facts or construction of competing legal meanings. The question whether the assessee's piling operations amounted to manufacture of goods, and further whether it was wholly or mainly engaged in such manufacture or processing, could not be answered without examining the actual nature of the business and drawing inferences from the record. Since two views were possible on these matters, the supposed error was not one apparent on the face of the record.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent from the record was shown, and rectification under section 154 was not permissible. The issue is decided against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

---