Debatable tax law issue cannot be treated as a mistake apparent from the record for rectification.

Rectification under tax law cannot be used to correct a debatable legal issue: where the applicability of the non-resident rate provision to a registered firm required elaborate argument and was not an obvious error on the record, the rectification power was unavailable. The text further notes that the scheme of assessment of registered firms treated the firm differently from an ordinary assessee, with income taxed in the partners' hands, and that applying the provision at the firm level could create anomalous results. On that basis, the rectification orders and consequential demand notices were quashed and further action under them was restrained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification orders could be sustained on the footing that the original assessments of a registered non-resident firm suffered from a mistake apparent from the record in not applying the non-resident rate provision, and whether such provision was in any event applicable to the firm.

Analysis: The power of rectification is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and does not extend to matters that require elaborate argument or a controversial examination of law. The question whether the non-resident rate provision applied to a registered firm raised a debatable issue, especially in the setting of the scheme of assessment of registered firms, under which the firm was not the substantive unit of taxation in the same sense as an ordinary assessee and the income was still brought to tax in the partners' hands. The Court further observed that applying the provision to the firm would produce anomalous results, including a tax burden exceeding the income itself, which reinforced the view that the non-application of the provision in the original assessments could not be treated as an obvious mistake.

Conclusion: The rectification proceedings were without jurisdiction, and the impugned assessment rectifications and demand notices could not be sustained.

Final Conclusion: Relief was granted to the assessee by quashing the rectification orders and consequential demand notices, with a restraint against further action under them.

Ratio Decidendi: A debatable point of law requiring elaborate argument cannot constitute a mistake apparent from the record for the purpose of rectification.

---