https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55830 A retrospective amendment inserting section 80J(1A) to require deduction of borrowed moneys and debts in computing capital employed could not, while its operation was stayed in related Supreme Court proceedings, be treated as creating a mistake apparent from the record for section 254(2) rectification. The Tribunal noted that the alleged inconsistency between its earlier order and the amended provision did not satisfy the standard for rectification where the amendment's operation was under challenge and stayed. On that basis, the miscellaneous application for rectification was not maintainable and was rejected. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:11:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55830 A retrospective amendment inserting section 80J(1A) to require deduction of borrowed moneys and debts in computing capital employed could not, while its operation was stayed in related Supreme Court proceedings, be treated as creating a mistake apparent from the record for section 254(2) rectification. The Tribunal noted that the alleged inconsistency between its earlier order and the amended provision did not satisfy the standard for rectification where the amendment's operation was under challenge and stayed. On that basis, the miscellaneous application for rectification was not maintainable and was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55830