https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381912 Rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act is confined to correcting an apparent mistake on the record and cannot be used to reopen a concluded merits-based finding or reappreciate evidence. The Tribunal had already examined the sale agreement, sale deed, cheque dates, bank entries and surrounding circumstances, and had treated the transfer of agricultural land as occurring on the agreement date for section 54B purposes. Because the Revenue's application sought a fresh merits review rather than correction of a patent error, no mistake apparent from the record was made out and the miscellaneous application was not maintainable. en-us Mon, 17 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381912 Rectification under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act is confined to correcting an apparent mistake on the record and cannot be used to reopen a concluded merits-based finding or reappreciate evidence. The Tribunal had already examined the sale agreement, sale deed, cheque dates, bank entries and surrounding circumstances, and had treated the transfer of agricultural land as occurring on the agreement date for section 54B purposes. Because the Revenue's application sought a fresh merits review rather than correction of a patent error, no mistake apparent from the record was made out and the miscellaneous application was not maintainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381912