Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Obvious mistake of law cannot be rectified U/s. 154, while mistake apparent from record can be rectified

Case Law Details

Case Name
M. K. Venkatachalaivi, I.T.O and Another Vs Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co., Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement Held, that the Income-tax Officer was justified in exercising his powers under s. 35 and rectifying the mistake. As a result of, the legal fiction about the retrospective operation of the Amendment Act, the subsequently inserted proviso must be read as. forming part of s. 18-A(5) of the principal Act as from April 1, 1952, and consequently the order of the income-tax Officer dated October 9, 1952, was inconsistent with the provisions of the proviso, and suffered from a mistake apparent from the record. Supreme Court of India  M. K. VENKATACHALAIVI, I. T. O. AND ANOTHER   Vs...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *