https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14110 The dominant issue was whether the appellate tribunal could invoke its rectification power under s. 254(2) of the Income-tax Act to correct the order concerning addition for alleged unexplained investments. The HC held that rectification lies only for a patent, obvious mistake apparent from the record, discoverable without argument, and does not extend to review or reappreciation of disputed facts or debatable legal issues. Alleged inaccuracies or wrong recording of facts were not ex facie errors meeting this threshold, and the proposed questions merely challenged factual conclusions without raising any question of law. Consequently, the rectification application was rejected and the tribunal's order stood undisturbed. en-us Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 04 Jan 2026 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14110 The dominant issue was whether the appellate tribunal could invoke its rectification power under s. 254(2) of the Income-tax Act to correct the order concerning addition for alleged unexplained investments. The HC held that rectification lies only for a patent, obvious mistake apparent from the record, discoverable without argument, and does not extend to review or reappreciation of disputed facts or debatable legal issues. Alleged inaccuracies or wrong recording of facts were not ex facie errors meeting this threshold, and the proposed questions merely challenged factual conclusions without raising any question of law. Consequently, the rectification application was rejected and the tribunal's order stood undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14110