TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (5) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2120/Jp/95 on 25th Aug., 2000. 2. The learned Departmental Representative submitted before us that the Tribunal vide it's aforesaid order dt. 25th Feb., 2000, has directed further deduction on account of depreciation, interest to third parties and interest paid to partners from the income computed by applying net profit rate. However, when the effects are given to the said order of the Tribunal, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me if the same ...... falls below the returned income and in such circumstances there was no need for the Department to file this miscellaneous application to waste the valuable time of the Tribunal. He, however, frankly and fairly submitted that the assessee has no-objection if the assessed income for the year under consideration is restricted to the income returned by the assessee. 4. We have c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....., 2000 in ITA No. 2120/Jp/95 and to that extent there is a mistake in the said order of the Tribunal which is apparent from record. In our opinion, this mistake, being patent and self evident, may be rectified under s. 254(2) in order to properly give necessary consequential effects to the aforesaid order of the Tribunal. In the case of ITO vs. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi (1969) 71 ITR 815 (SC), the Hon'....