Maintainability and apparent record error in jewellery valuation justified rectification on net weight basis.

An appeal against a rectification order under the Estate Duty Act was held maintainable because the appellate authority had also decided the matter on merits, so the technical objection to competence failed. The jewellery valuation was treated as rectifiable as a mistake apparent from the record where the disclosure showed gross and net weight entries but omitted the corresponding grams figure for the item in question. The omission was viewed as typographical, and the net weight was directed to be adopted for valuation, resulting in revision of the assessment in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an appeal lay against the order passed under section 61 of the Estate Duty Act; (ii) Whether the valuation of jewellery could be rectified on the ground that the disclosure reflected gross weight and not net weight, resulting in a mistake apparent from the record.

Issue (i): Whether an appeal lay against the order passed under section 61 of the Estate Duty Act.

Analysis: The technical objection that no appeal lay against the rectification order was not accepted, since the appellate authority had also examined the matter on merits. The assessee's case was treated as falling within the statutory appellate provision relied upon, and the appeal was held maintainable notwithstanding the objection to competence.

Conclusion: The objection to maintainability failed and the appeal was held maintainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the valuation of jewellery could be rectified on the ground that the disclosure reflected gross weight and not net weight, resulting in a mistake apparent from the record.

Analysis: The record showed separate references to gross weight and net weight in grams as well as in tolas. The omission to specify the weight in terms of grams for the jewellery in the same manner as the other entries was treated as apparent. Since the jewellery included stones and the disclosure consistently indicated gross and net weight, the mistake was held to be typographical and fit for rectification, requiring adoption of the net weight for valuation.

Conclusion: The valuation error was held to be a mistake apparent from the record and rectification was directed in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the objection to appealability was rejected, and the assessment was directed to be revised by valuing the jewellery on the basis of net weight.

Ratio Decidendi: A valuation entry showing an apparent omission in the expression of gross and net weight can be corrected as a mistake apparent from the record, and a technical objection to appealability does not survive where the appellate authority has also decided the matter on merits.

---