Binding precedent on land valuation can create a rectifiable mistake when omitted from the Tribunal's decision.

Failure to consider a binding Supreme Court ruling directly governing valuation of acquired land under wealth-tax law was treated by the majority as a mistake apparent from the record, justifying rectification of the Tribunal's earlier order. The majority held that the omitted decision applied to the core valuation issue, so the assessment had to be reconsidered in light of that ratio and the miscellaneous application was allowed. The dissenting member considered the Supreme Court ruling inapplicable and found no apparent mistake. The note states that non-application of a binding precedent on the decisive issue can fall within rectification jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether non-consideration of the Supreme Court decision on valuation of compensation for acquired land constituted a mistake apparent from the record warranting rectification of the Tribunal's earlier order.

Analysis: The majority held that the Supreme Court decision laid down the governing principle for valuation of the acquired asset under wealth-tax law and was directly relevant to the assessee's case. Failure to consider a binding decision bearing on the core valuation issue was treated as a legal error falling within the scope of rectification for mistake apparent from the record. The earlier valuation was therefore required to be reconsidered in light of the Supreme Court's ratio.

Conclusion: The miscellaneous application was allowed and the matter was sent back for disposal in accordance with law.

Concurring Opinion: The Vice President agreed that the Supreme Court ruling governed the valuation issue and that omission to apply it amounted to an apparent mistake.

Dissenting Opinion: The Judicial Member held that the cited Supreme Court decision was not directly applicable and that no mistake apparent from the record was shown.

Ratio Decidendi: Failure to apply a binding Supreme Court decision directly governing the issue decided amounts to a mistake apparent from the record and can be corrected in rectification proceedings.

---