Rectification powers under estate duty law are limited to apparent mistakes and require prior hearing before any enhancement.

Rectification under section 61 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 is limited to mistakes apparent from the record; where the valuation issue had already been considered in the assessment and appellate orders, a later rectification that merely changed that conclusion was without jurisdiction. An enhancing rectification is also invalid unless the accountable person is first given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. On these facts, the rectification order was quashed and the estate duty demand had to remain governed by the earlier appellate order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification order enhancing estate duty was sustainable under section 61 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, in the absence of a mistake apparent from the record and without giving the accountable person a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Analysis: The power of rectification under section 61 extends only to mistakes apparent from the record. On the facts, the valuation of the area not under cultivation had already been considered in the assessment proceedings and in the appellate order, and the later rectification merely altered that conclusion without disclosing any patent mistake on the record. The proviso to section 61 also barred enhancement of estate duty unless the accountable person was given a reasonable opportunity of being heard; no such opportunity was afforded before the impugned rectification was made.

Conclusion: The rectification order was jurisdiction and invalid. The order was liable to be quashed, and the estate duty demand had to stand in accordance with the earlier appellate order.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification under section 61 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record, and any rectification enhancing duty is void unless preceded by a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

---