<?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>1989 (3) TMI 72 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23944</link>
    <description>Rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is limited to obvious and patent mistakes apparent from the record. Where identifying the alleged error requires a long-drawn process of reasoning or the issue admits of more than one plausible view, the matter becomes debatable and falls outside rectification jurisdiction. On that basis, the alleged mistake was not apparent from the record and the rectification order could not be sustained; the referred question was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:53:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=62942" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (3) TMI 72 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23944</link>
      <description>Rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is limited to obvious and patent mistakes apparent from the record. Where identifying the alleged error requires a long-drawn process of reasoning or the issue admits of more than one plausible view, the matter becomes debatable and falls outside rectification jurisdiction. On that basis, the alleged mistake was not apparent from the record and the rectification order could not be sustained; the referred question was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>