1969 (9) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 00% and the benefit of the concessional rate incorporated in section 8(1)(b) of the Act was not extended to the petitioner because he did not file any Form 'C' in respect of the relevant sales. The assessment order was made on 29th October, 1965. Subsequently it is said, the petitioner received the 'C' Forms from the purchasing dealers. He made an application under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... itional Judge (Revisions). The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner before us is that the Sales Tax Officer erred in not rectifying the assessment order by taking into account the 'C' Forms filed by him. Now, the jurisdiction under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act enables the Sales Tax Officer to rectify any mistake apparent on the face of the record of assessment. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere is any mistake apparent on the face of the record of assessment. The record of assessment did not include the 'C' Forms when the assessment order was made and, therefore, there was no mistake apparent on the face of the record by reference to the 'C' Forms. We are not satisfied that the case falls within the scope of section 22 of the Act. This ground for challenging the validity of the impugn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X