https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24824 HC allowed the petition, holding that sections 254(2) and 154 of the Income-tax Act permit rectification of mistakes apparent from record and have broader scope than Order 47, r.1 CPC. The court accepted that a subsequent binding decision taking a different legal view can constitute an error apparent on the face of the record and justify review; reliance on the more restrictive Order 47, r.1 CPC was unnecessary. The original assessment was corrected and Exhibit P-6 was quashed. en-us Tue, 26 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Oct 2025 19:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24824 HC allowed the petition, holding that sections 254(2) and 154 of the Income-tax Act permit rectification of mistakes apparent from record and have broader scope than Order 47, r.1 CPC. The court accepted that a subsequent binding decision taking a different legal view can constitute an error apparent on the face of the record and justify review; reliance on the more restrictive Order 47, r.1 CPC was unnecessary. The original assessment was corrected and Exhibit P-6 was quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24824