https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20893 HC held that the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction under section 254(2) by recalling its earlier order on the assessee's rectification application. The alleged "mistake apparent from the record" was in substance a reappraisal of facts and a de novo exercise of judicial discretion, amounting to an impermissible review. Since all issues had already been considered under section 254(1) and no specific apparent error was demonstrated, section 254(2) could not be invoked. Any perceived perversity in the original order was remediable only through reference proceedings under section 256. Consequently, the HC held the recall order unsustainable in law and restored the Tribunal's original order, restraining it from rehearing the appeal on merits under the guise of rectification. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Dec 2025 19:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20893 HC held that the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction under section 254(2) by recalling its earlier order on the assessee's rectification application. The alleged "mistake apparent from the record" was in substance a reappraisal of facts and a de novo exercise of judicial discretion, amounting to an impermissible review. Since all issues had already been considered under section 254(1) and no specific apparent error was demonstrated, section 254(2) could not be invoked. Any perceived perversity in the original order was remediable only through reference proceedings under section 256. Consequently, the HC held the recall order unsustainable in law and restored the Tribunal's original order, restraining it from rehearing the appeal on merits under the guise of rectification. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20893