1982 (12) TMI 182

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....any order passed by it "rectify any error apparent on the face of the record". In this case, the original orders were passed by the Tribunal on 31st January, 1978, and 25th April, 1978, respectively. Those orders had been rendered in appeals filed by two assessees who were hoteliers. They contended before the Tribunal that the receipts from their hotel business could not be subjected to sales tax as sales turnover. This contention was rejected by the Tribunal in their orders dated 25th April, 1978, and 31st January, 1978. Subsequently, on 7th September, 1978, the Supreme Court rendered a judgment in Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi [1978] 42 STC 386 (SC). In this judgment it was held that where eatables were ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... only error of this kind which is amenable to correction or rectification under section 55.   In the present case, with the fullest information on facts made available to the Tribunal and with the most up to date knowledge of the law, it would still be impossible for such a body to have anticipated what the Supreme Court's decision would have been a few months later. It follows, therefore, that the error could not be said to be an apparent error within the meaning of section 55. The learned counsel for the assessees put forward the well-known doctrine of jurisprudence that whenever a court declares what the law is, it takes effect, not from the date of the judgment, but from the very date of the commencement of the law in questio....