https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8713 Rectification under section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was confined to obvious and patent mistakes apparent from the record; it could not be used to revisit a concluded legal view on the rate of super-tax applicable to a company treated as an investment company. Where the original section 23A orders rested on a legal inference and the later orders merely substituted a different interpretation of the statutory provisions, the error was debatable rather than apparent. The rectification orders were therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed, and the assessee succeeded. en-us Thu, 21 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8713 Rectification under section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was confined to obvious and patent mistakes apparent from the record; it could not be used to revisit a concluded legal view on the rate of super-tax applicable to a company treated as an investment company. Where the original section 23A orders rested on a legal inference and the later orders merely substituted a different interpretation of the statutory provisions, the error was debatable rather than apparent. The rectification orders were therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed, and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8713