https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8579 Rectification under section 154 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to resolve a debatable question about the actual cost of assets acquired in exchange for fully paid shares. A disputed valuation issue of that kind is not a self-evident error, so the proposed rectification notice lacks jurisdiction. Where the jurisdictional fact is absent, the High Court may intervene under article 226 and restrain further proceedings on the invalid notice by writ of prohibition. en-us Fri, 15 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8579 Rectification under section 154 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to resolve a debatable question about the actual cost of assets acquired in exchange for fully paid shares. A disputed valuation issue of that kind is not a self-evident error, so the proposed rectification notice lacks jurisdiction. Where the jurisdictional fact is absent, the High Court may intervene under article 226 and restrain further proceedings on the invalid notice by writ of prohibition. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8579