<?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>1957 (11) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285165</link>
    <description>Section 35(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 permits rectification only of a mistake apparent from the record, meaning an error that is plain and obvious without detailed debate. Where the assessee had failed to comply with section 18A(3), section 18A(8) made the levy of interest mandatory on the regular assessment. The omission to add that compulsory interest was therefore an obvious error on the assessment record and could be corrected under section 35(1).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2019 12:31:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=598893" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (11) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285165</link>
      <description>Section 35(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 permits rectification only of a mistake apparent from the record, meaning an error that is plain and obvious without detailed debate. Where the assessee had failed to comply with section 18A(3), section 18A(8) made the levy of interest mandatory on the regular assessment. The omission to add that compulsory interest was therefore an obvious error on the assessment record and could be corrected under section 35(1).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285165</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>