https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440705 Rectification under section 254(2) is limited to patent mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits of an earlier Tribunal order. Where the Tribunal had already considered the assessee's contentions and material, a complaint that a different factual view should have been taken did not disclose any rectifiable error. The Tribunal also held that seeking to reopen issues already decided amounted to an impermissible review, not rectification, even where the order had followed an earlier year's decision on identical facts. The miscellaneous application was therefore rejected and the earlier order left undisturbed. en-us Tue, 20 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Jul 2023 08:13:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440705 Rectification under section 254(2) is limited to patent mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits of an earlier Tribunal order. Where the Tribunal had already considered the assessee's contentions and material, a complaint that a different factual view should have been taken did not disclose any rectifiable error. The Tribunal also held that seeking to reopen issues already decided amounted to an impermissible review, not rectification, even where the order had followed an earlier year's decision on identical facts. The miscellaneous application was therefore rejected and the earlier order left undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440705