Rectification under section 254(2) cannot be used to raise a new debatable contention or seek review of an earlier Tribunal order.

Section 254(2) permits rectification only of a manifest mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to advance a new, debatable contention or seek review of an earlier order. The Tribunal held that the Revenue's objection to the admission of an additional ground and the remand for fresh consideration did not disclose any patent or self-evident error, because the issue required legal reasoning and further examination of facts. The rectification application was therefore not maintainable and was rejected, leaving the earlier order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue established a mistake apparent from the record warranting rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to the Tribunal's earlier order admitting an additional ground and remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the Revenue was seeking to raise, through rectification, a new contention that had not been urged when the appeal was originally heard. The alleged error did not arise from any patent or self-evident mistake in the record. The question whether the additional ground could be admitted and whether further examination of facts was necessary involved a debatable issue of law and reasoning, not a clerical or obvious mistake. The Tribunal also observed that the power under section 254(2) is confined to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used as a substitute for review or to reargue the merits of the original order.

Conclusion: The Revenue failed to show any mistake apparent from the record. The rectification application was not maintainable on the grounds urged and was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal declined to interfere with its earlier order and left undisturbed the admission of the additional ground and the remand directed for fresh examination.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 254(2) permits correction only of manifest, obvious errors apparent from the record and cannot be invoked to advance a new, debatable contention or to seek a review of the Tribunal's earlier decision.

---