https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151373 Rectification notices under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were upheld because the earlier High Court ruling was still binding in the State until reversed by the Supreme Court, and its pendency in appeal did not suspend that force. The Court further held that a later authoritative ruling may disclose a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. The notices were not invalid merely because the earlier decision might be distinguishable, since that issue required examination in the rectification proceedings after hearing the dealers. The writ petitions were dismissed and the Sales Tax Officer was permitted to proceed according to law. en-us Tue, 04 Jan 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Jun 2013 12:08:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151373 Rectification notices under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were upheld because the earlier High Court ruling was still binding in the State until reversed by the Supreme Court, and its pendency in appeal did not suspend that force. The Court further held that a later authoritative ruling may disclose a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. The notices were not invalid merely because the earlier decision might be distinguishable, since that issue required examination in the rectification proceedings after hearing the dealers. The writ petitions were dismissed and the Sales Tax Officer was permitted to proceed according to law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Jan 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151373