https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328878 Section 254(2) permits only correction of a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to review, recall or rehear issues already decided on merits. The Tribunal held that the Miscellaneous Applications sought a fresh appraisal of findings on closing stock valuation, stock discrepancies, lease commitment charges and unexplained jewellery, which fell outside rectification jurisdiction. Rule 24 also did not assist because the matter was not an ex parte disposal for reasonable cause. The challenge to reopen the concluded issues was therefore not maintainable, and the earlier rejection of the jewellery ground remained undisturbed. en-us Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:10:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328878 Section 254(2) permits only correction of a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to review, recall or rehear issues already decided on merits. The Tribunal held that the Miscellaneous Applications sought a fresh appraisal of findings on closing stock valuation, stock discrepancies, lease commitment charges and unexplained jewellery, which fell outside rectification jurisdiction. Rule 24 also did not assist because the matter was not an ex parte disposal for reasonable cause. The challenge to reopen the concluded issues was therefore not maintainable, and the earlier rejection of the jewellery ground remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328878