https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310849 Rectification under the ITAT's miscellaneous application jurisdiction was rejected because the Revenue challenged only the computation adopted in the earlier order, while the Bench had already considered the same facts and consciously applied 2% of the operating revenue of the manufacturing segment. As no error apparent from the record was shown, the matter did not meet the threshold for rectification. The miscellaneous application was therefore dismissed on merits. en-us Wed, 07 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Nov 2023 20:41:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310849 Rectification under the ITAT's miscellaneous application jurisdiction was rejected because the Revenue challenged only the computation adopted in the earlier order, while the Bench had already considered the same facts and consciously applied 2% of the operating revenue of the manufacturing segment. As no error apparent from the record was shown, the matter did not meet the threshold for rectification. The miscellaneous application was therefore dismissed on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310849