https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35852 Sections 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and 147(b) of the 1961 Act operate in distinct fields: section 35 corrects an error apparent on the record, while section 147(b) addresses escaped income on satisfaction of its statutory preconditions. The availability of both remedies did not create article 14 discrimination, the absence of a separate appeal against rectification under section 35 was not unconstitutional where the amended assessment remained appealable, and the different limitation periods were valid because they were tied to different statutory purposes. The article accordingly states that the constitutional challenge failed and the rectification scheme was upheld as valid. en-us Mon, 23 Jun 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:59:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35852 Sections 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and 147(b) of the 1961 Act operate in distinct fields: section 35 corrects an error apparent on the record, while section 147(b) addresses escaped income on satisfaction of its statutory preconditions. The availability of both remedies did not create article 14 discrimination, the absence of a separate appeal against rectification under section 35 was not unconstitutional where the amended assessment remained appealable, and the different limitation periods were valid because they were tied to different statutory purposes. The article accordingly states that the constitutional challenge failed and the rectification scheme was upheld as valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Jun 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35852