9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (2) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ernment on March 9, 1973. The application having been made beyond the period of three years the question of applicability of section 22 did not arise. The learned counsel for the State Government has, however, contended that the dates mentioned in the judgment of the High Court are not correct. According to the learned counsel the application for rectification was made on March 9, 1972 and not on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22 of the Act was as under: "The assessing, appellate or revising authority may at any time within three years from the date of any order passed by him rectify any mistake apparent on the face of the record of appeal, revision, assessment or refund as the case may be." The revising authority under the Act dismissed the revision petition of the assessee by an order dated April 17, 1969. The ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion before the High Court which allowed the same on the short ground that the revising authority had no jurisdiction under section 22 of the Act to revise the order dated April 17, 1969, after more than three years. The High Court interpreted section 22 to mean that the revising authority has to pass an order rectifying the mistake within three years of the order to be rectified. According to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the following proviso was added: "Provided that where an application under this sub-section has been made within such period of three years, it may be disposed of even beyond such period. " The question before us has, thus, been answered in favour of the State by the above amendment. Although the present case relates to the period prior to the amendment, it is not necessary to go into the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
