1990 (5) TMI 216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioner filed an application before the Superintendent of Taxes under section 12(1) of the Act for rectification of mistake apparent from the records. The mistake, according to the petitioner, was the failure to consider the revised return filed by him before the completion of the assessment under section 8(3) of the Act. His contention was that the assessment had been made erroneously on the basis of the original return, which, in fact, had been revised. The said petition for rectification was rejected by the Superintendent of Taxes by his order dated October 4, 1982. In the said order it was, however, admitted that the dealer had submitted a revised return showing lesser turnover than what had been shown in the original return. The praye....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mistake of fact or both? According to the Superintendent of Taxes a mistake of fact is not one covered by section 12(1) of the Act. The submission of a revised return and non-consideration thereof, according to him, was a mistake of fact. It is on this basis that the petition for rectification was rejected. The Commissioner of Taxes instead of deciding the point at issue went into the examination of the justification of submission of revised return or the merits thereof, which was not permissible in such a case in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Section 12(1) speaks of "mistake". It does not specify the nature of the mistake except that it restricts the power of rectification to "mistakes" which are apparent from the records of the ....