<?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>1982 (11) TMI 41 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28759</link>
    <description>Rectification under the Act is confined to errors apparent from the assessment record and cannot be used to revise a concluded assessment on the basis of external material or a mere change of opinion. Here, the original assessment was made on the return showing coffee sale price at Rs. 5.50 per point, and no contrary Coffee Board fixation was apparent from the record at that stage. The court further noted that the coffee income rule, including the proviso on excess receipts of an earlier season, required treatment within the relevant assessment framework and did not justify rectification. The rectification order and consequential demand notice were therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:06:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=67756" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (11) TMI 41 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28759</link>
      <description>Rectification under the Act is confined to errors apparent from the assessment record and cannot be used to revise a concluded assessment on the basis of external material or a mere change of opinion. Here, the original assessment was made on the return showing coffee sale price at Rs. 5.50 per point, and no contrary Coffee Board fixation was apparent from the record at that stage. The court further noted that the coffee income rule, including the proviso on excess receipts of an earlier season, required treatment within the relevant assessment framework and did not justify rectification. The rectification order and consequential demand notice were therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28759</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>