https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377790 Section 69 rectification is confined to correcting a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen concluded issues or seek a rehearing on debatable matters. The authority's order was upheld because the reasons recorded showed application of mind and did not amount to a non-speaking order. The writ challenge also failed because an efficacious statutory appellate remedy was available and no recognised exception, such as breach of natural justice or lack of jurisdiction, was made out. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory remedy. en-us Thu, 31 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Apr 2019 06:37:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377790 Section 69 rectification is confined to correcting a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen concluded issues or seek a rehearing on debatable matters. The authority's order was upheld because the reasons recorded showed application of mind and did not amount to a non-speaking order. The writ challenge also failed because an efficacious statutory appellate remedy was available and no recognised exception, such as breach of natural justice or lack of jurisdiction, was made out. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory remedy. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 31 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377790