Rectification under section 254(2) cannot be used to review merits or reopen a concluded view on section 115BBE.

Section 254(2) permits only rectification of a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to rehear an appeal or review a concluded order. Because the original order had already considered the facts, submissions and case law, and the application sought reconsideration of the section 115BBE issue on merits rather than correction of a self-evident error, no rectifiable mistake was shown. The miscellaneous application was therefore rejected as not maintainable, and the earlier view was not reopened.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could rectify its earlier order under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the applicability of the amended section 115BBE for the relevant assessment year had been wrongly decided.

Analysis: The Tribunal reiterated that the power under section 254(2) is confined to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record and does not permit a rehearing of the appeal or a review of the earlier decision. It noted that the original order had already considered the facts, rival submissions, and case law, and that the revenue was effectively seeking reconsideration on merits rather than correction of any obvious error. Applying the settled principle that an error apparent must be self-evident and not require long-drawn reasoning or a fresh appraisal of the record, the Tribunal held that no such mistake was shown.

Conclusion: The miscellaneous application was not maintainable for rectification and was rejected; the earlier view on section 115BBE was not reopened.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal declined to exercise rectification jurisdiction because the application sought review on merits rather than correction of an apparent mistake.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 254(2) confers only limited rectification power and cannot be used to revisit or review a concluded order on debatable issues or possible alternative views.

---