https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206431 An oral pronouncement in open court, when recorded in the order sheet, was treated as a final judicial act, so rectification under section 254(2) could not be used to reopen the concluded matter absent a clear mistake apparent from the record. On the merits, additions based on survey statements and related material were not finally sustained because the first appellate authority had admitted fresh evidence without complying with Rule 46A or giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to rebut it. The proper course was fresh adjudication after due opportunity to both sides, and the Revenue's appeals were dismissed by majority. en-us Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Nov 2011 08:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206431 An oral pronouncement in open court, when recorded in the order sheet, was treated as a final judicial act, so rectification under section 254(2) could not be used to reopen the concluded matter absent a clear mistake apparent from the record. On the merits, additions based on survey statements and related material were not finally sustained because the first appellate authority had admitted fresh evidence without complying with Rule 46A or giving the Assessing Officer an opportunity to rebut it. The proper course was fresh adjudication after due opportunity to both sides, and the Revenue's appeals were dismissed by majority. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206431