https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11977 The court analyzed the scope of rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that it does not allow for a review of earlier orders but only rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. It clarified that a mistake must be glaring and obvious to qualify for rectification. Regarding section 69C on unexplained sources of expenditure, the court highlighted the importance of explaining the source rather than its reasonableness. Ultimately, the court ruled against the assessee, disposing of the reference in favor of the Revenue without costs. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11977 The court analyzed the scope of rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that it does not allow for a review of earlier orders but only rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. It clarified that a mistake must be glaring and obvious to qualify for rectification. Regarding section 69C on unexplained sources of expenditure, the court highlighted the importance of explaining the source rather than its reasonableness. Ultimately, the court ruled against the assessee, disposing of the reference in favor of the Revenue without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11977