<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (2) TMI 634 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159731</link>
    <description>Rectification under the tax rectification provision is available only for a mistake apparent from the record, meaning an obvious error that does not call for detailed argument or further examination. Where the relevant notifications contained no specific entry for tamarind seed powder, the general tax rate applied, so the earlier assessment at 5 per cent was an obvious record error. The rectification and escaped-assessment provisions were treated as distinct but not mutually exclusive, so rectification could still be used even when the assessment order itself contained an apparent mistake. Rectification under section 17 was therefore permissible, and the challenge to the rectification orders failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (2) TMI 634 - RAJASTHAN TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159731</link>
      <description>Rectification under the tax rectification provision is available only for a mistake apparent from the record, meaning an obvious error that does not call for detailed argument or further examination. Where the relevant notifications contained no specific entry for tamarind seed powder, the general tax rate applied, so the earlier assessment at 5 per cent was an obvious record error. The rectification and escaped-assessment provisions were treated as distinct but not mutually exclusive, so rectification could still be used even when the assessment order itself contained an apparent mistake. Rectification under section 17 was therefore permissible, and the challenge to the rectification orders failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159731</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>