https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202232 Section 254(2) permits the ITAT to rectify a mistake apparent from the record within the prescribed period where the Tribunal's error, omission or mistake has caused prejudice to a party. This statutory rectification power is directed at preventing such prejudice and does not depend on inherent review jurisdiction. Although earlier views treated complete recall as an impermissible review or rehearing, the principles in Honda Siel and Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange support recall or amendment of the entire order where a manifest Tribunal-attributable mistake requires that relief to do justice. Precedents must be applied according to their ratio and factual context. en-us Fri, 24 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jan 2026 13:16:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202232 Section 254(2) permits the ITAT to rectify a mistake apparent from the record within the prescribed period where the Tribunal's error, omission or mistake has caused prejudice to a party. This statutory rectification power is directed at preventing such prejudice and does not depend on inherent review jurisdiction. Although earlier views treated complete recall as an impermissible review or rehearing, the principles in Honda Siel and Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange support recall or amendment of the entire order where a manifest Tribunal-attributable mistake requires that relief to do justice. Precedents must be applied according to their ratio and factual context. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202232