Rectification power cannot resolve a debatable question of law; only patent errors apparent from the record qualify.

Section 154 rectification is confined to mistakes that are obvious, patent and self-evident from the record. A point requiring investigation of the legal position, long-drawn reasoning, or on which two views are reasonably possible is not a mistake apparent from the record. On that basis, the applicability of section 17(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 to a registered firm could not be conclusively determined in rectification proceedings, because it involved a debatable question of law. The completed assessments therefore could not be reopened under section 154, and the rectification was invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Income-tax Officer could invoke rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the original assessments suffered from a mistake apparent from the record, namely non-application of section 17(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 to a registered firm.

Analysis: Rectification under section 154 is confined to mistakes that are obvious, patent and self-evident from the record. A point that requires investigation of the legal position or a long drawn process of reasoning, or on which two views are reasonably possible, is not a mistake apparent from the record. The applicability of section 17(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 to the assessee-firm was not free from doubt, and the scope of the relevant provisions could not be conclusively determined in rectification proceedings. The officer therefore could not reopen the completed assessments under section 154 by resolving a debatable question of law.

Conclusion: The rectification was invalid and the assessee succeeded on the issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification power for a mistake apparent from the record cannot be used to decide a debatable question of law or to correct an error that is not obvious and patent on the face of the record.

---