https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38976 The court held that the notice under section 154 was issued within the limitation period but determined that the proposed mistake was not self-evident and involved complex issues with multiple interpretations. Consequently, the court found that rectification under section 154 was not justified. The impugned notice was quashed, and the respondents were prohibited from implementing it. The rule was made absolute with no costs awarded, and the order's operation was stayed for six weeks. en-us Tue, 02 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Apr 2010 17:09:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38976 The court held that the notice under section 154 was issued within the limitation period but determined that the proposed mistake was not self-evident and involved complex issues with multiple interpretations. Consequently, the court found that rectification under section 154 was not justified. The impugned notice was quashed, and the respondents were prohibited from implementing it. The rule was made absolute with no costs awarded, and the order's operation was stayed for six weeks. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 02 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38976