https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38516 Non-consideration of the Explanation to rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, while treating items as reserves was a patent omission capable of rectification under section 13. The High Court held that failure to notice a statutory provision directly governing the assessment can amount to a mistake apparent from the record. The assessee's contention that the issue was debatable did not prevail, as the proceedings had proceeded on the footing that the Explanation applied to the items in question. The rectification was therefore valid and the reference was answered against the assessee. en-us Thu, 28 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:24:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38516 Non-consideration of the Explanation to rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, while treating items as reserves was a patent omission capable of rectification under section 13. The High Court held that failure to notice a statutory provision directly governing the assessment can amount to a mistake apparent from the record. The assessee's contention that the issue was debatable did not prevail, as the proceedings had proceeded on the footing that the Explanation applied to the items in question. The rectification was therefore valid and the reference was answered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38516