Rectification power cannot be used as a review mechanism; a recall request based on inadequate discussion was rejected.

The Tribunal's rectification power under section 254(2) and Rule 24 is limited to correcting a mistake apparent from the record. A request to recall an earlier appellate order on the ground that all papers and cited judgments were not discussed in detail was rejected because the earlier order had already considered the facts and arguments of both sides, and the absence of elaborate discussion did not show non-application of mind. The Tribunal held that the relief sought was in substance a review or rehearing, which is impermissible because the Tribunal has no inherent power to review its own concluded order. The miscellaneous petitions were therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could recall its earlier appellate order in exercise of rectification powers on the ground that the papers and case-law relied on by the assessee had not been discussed, and whether such a request amounted to an impermissible review rather than rectification.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that recall of its order is permissible only within the limited scope of Rule 24 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 and section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, namely to correct a mistake apparent from the record. The grievance raised by the assessee was that the earlier order did not discuss every document and every cited judgment in detail. The Tribunal found that its earlier order had already recorded consideration of the facts and arguments of both sides and that absence of elaborate discussion did not show non-application of mind. It further held that the requested rehearing would in substance amount to review, but the Tribunal has no inherent power to review its own order and cannot use rectification as a substitute for review.

Conclusion: The request for recall was not maintainable and the Tribunal declined to reopen the appeal on merits.

Final Conclusion: The miscellaneous petitions were rejected because no apparent mistake warranting recall was shown, and the Tribunal could not grant a fresh hearing in the guise of rectification.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal's power under section 254(2) is confined to rectifying an apparent mistake on the record and cannot be used to undertake a review or rehearing of the merits of a concluded order.

---