https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157655 A corrigendum correcting an obvious clerical or printing error in a statutory notification relates back to the original notification date and does not operate as a fresh substantive notification. The correction was treated as ancillary to the power under section 4-B read with the relevant rules, not as a notification issued under section 25, so the six-month limit in section 25 was inapplicable. On that basis, the later corrigendum did not preserve the 1968 notification for the assessment years in question, and the assessee could not claim the concessional benefit on that footing. Revenue's revisions were upheld. en-us Sat, 05 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Oct 2013 11:47:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157655 A corrigendum correcting an obvious clerical or printing error in a statutory notification relates back to the original notification date and does not operate as a fresh substantive notification. The correction was treated as ancillary to the power under section 4-B read with the relevant rules, not as a notification issued under section 25, so the six-month limit in section 25 was inapplicable. On that basis, the later corrigendum did not preserve the 1968 notification for the assessment years in question, and the assessee could not claim the concessional benefit on that footing. Revenue's revisions were upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sat, 05 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157655