https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211248 Section 254(2) permits only rectification of a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen or reargue the merits of a concluded Tribunal decision. A delay in pronouncement beyond the usual period did not vitiate the order where it was explained by an extraordinary circumstance and no omission from consideration was shown. Pronouncement by a substituted Member was also valid because the original Members had signed the order and the prescribed procedure for substituted pronouncement was followed. The Miscellaneous Application was therefore not maintainable for reconsideration of the merits. en-us Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211248 Section 254(2) permits only rectification of a patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen or reargue the merits of a concluded Tribunal decision. A delay in pronouncement beyond the usual period did not vitiate the order where it was explained by an extraordinary circumstance and no omission from consideration was shown. Pronouncement by a substituted Member was also valid because the original Members had signed the order and the prescribed procedure for substituted pronouncement was followed. The Miscellaneous Application was therefore not maintainable for reconsideration of the merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211248