Rectification of mistaken remand under section 254(2) confined fresh consideration to the limited section 54F dispute.

A mistaken remand to the wrong authority, evident from the record, was treated as a rectifiable error under section 254(2). The Tribunal noted that the dispute was confined to the section 54F claim concerning the Ahmedabad flat and the effect of additional evidence, rather than all issues in appeal. It therefore modified the earlier order by confining the remand to the limited controversy and directing fresh verification and decision by the Assessing Officer instead of the Commissioner (Appeals). The rectification application succeeded to that extent.

---

---

Issues: Whether the earlier appellate order contained a mistake apparent from the record warranting rectification under section 254(2), and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer instead of the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration of the additional evidence on the section 54F claim.

Analysis: The record showed that the assessee had produced additional evidence in support of the claim that the flat in question had not been acquired so as to attract violation of the conditions for deduction under section 54F. The earlier order had restored the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration of all issues, whereas the controversy before the Tribunal was confined to the flat at Ahmedabad and the effect of the additional evidence. In these circumstances, the Tribunal treated the mistaken restoration to the Commissioner (Appeals) as an apparent error and corrected the earlier order by directing restoration to the Assessing Officer for verification and fresh decision on the limited issue.

Conclusion: The rectification application was accepted in substance, and the earlier order was modified to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on the limited section 54F issue.

Final Conclusion: The miscellaneous application succeeded to the extent of correction of the forum of remand and confinement of the remand to the specific issue concerning the flat at Ahmedabad.

Ratio Decidendi: A mistaken remand to the wrong authority, when evident from the record and arising from the scope of the issue actually considered, is rectifiable under section 254(2) and may be corrected by directing fresh consideration by the proper authority on the limited controversy.

---