https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449800 Section 33 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 permits rectification only within two years, so a belated rectification request is time-barred. Section 40(1) allows revisional action by the Commissioner, but the proviso bars revision after five years from the order date, and the revision must also conclude within that period; mere initiation in time is insufficient if the final revisional order is delayed beyond limitation. Section 41 also empowers the Tribunal to review an order suffering from patent errors of law, including an erroneous view on limitation for revision. On that basis, the review was maintainable and the order allowing review and rejecting the assessee's appeal was upheld. en-us Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:10:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449800 Section 33 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 permits rectification only within two years, so a belated rectification request is time-barred. Section 40(1) allows revisional action by the Commissioner, but the proviso bars revision after five years from the order date, and the revision must also conclude within that period; mere initiation in time is insufficient if the final revisional order is delayed beyond limitation. Section 41 also empowers the Tribunal to review an order suffering from patent errors of law, including an erroneous view on limitation for revision. On that basis, the review was maintainable and the order allowing review and rejecting the assessee's appeal was upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449800