Rectification under section 254(2) cannot be used to seek review on merits; recall request was rejected.

A Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) seeking recall of an earlier ITAT order was held to be outside the narrow rectification power because it did not disclose any mistake apparent from the record. The application in substance attempted to reopen the merits, including the character of the land and the effect of its sale, whereas the earlier order had only remitted the distance-from-municipal-limits issue for verification with reference to the applicable CBDT circular. Section 254(2) permits correction of obvious mistakes only, not review or re-adjudication, so the application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Miscellaneous Application filed under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 seeking recall of the earlier order was maintainable, or whether it was in substance an impermissible review outside the narrow scope of rectification.

Analysis: The application was examined in the context of the earlier order, which had only remitted the matter for verification of the distance of the land from the municipal limits and had relied upon the applicable CBDT circular on that aspect. The challenge raised in the Miscellaneous Application did not disclose any mistake apparent from the record; instead, it sought reconsideration of the merits, including the character of the land and the effect of the sale. Such a challenge amounts to review, whereas section 254(2) permits only correction of an obvious mistake and does not confer power to re-argue or re-adjudicate the matter.

Conclusion: The Miscellaneous Application was not maintainable under section 254(2) and was rejected.

---