2022 (7) TMI 1639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve in the light of the case law discussed by them in the written submissions. 2. According to the assessee, at the time of hearing, an elaborate written submissions stating that the sale deed dated 20/04/2009 was for the purpose of obtaining a loan from M/s. India Bulls, but not for any other purpose and submitted his intention in his written submissions citing the decisions on that aspect. According to him, the contents of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 16/04/2009 at page No.6 to the effect that the purchaser had already paid the entire sale consideration of Rs. 3,00,67,000/- to vendor as per the MoU. His grievance is that the Bench failed to peruse the grounds of appeal and the written submissions that the intention of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd., (2021) 133 taxmann.com 41 (SC). 4. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. The question now that arises for our consideration is whether any error in judgment which alleged to have been the result of non-consideration of the submissions made on behalf of the assessee in the perspective in which they were projected, would constitute an error apparent on record, so as to be recalled by the Tribunal in exercise of powers under section 254(2) of the Act. 5. Under section 254(2) of the Act, the Tribunal may at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectify any mistake apparent from record, amen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not confer jurisdiction upon the ITAT to pass the order de hors section 254(2) of the Act, and the powers under section 254(2) of the Act are only to correct and/or rectify the mistake apparent from the record and not beyond that. Hon'ble Apex Court held that even the observations that the merits might have been decided erroneously and the ITAT had jurisdiction and within its powers it may pass an order recalling its earlier order which is an erroneous order, cannot be accepted, and if the order passed by the ITAT was erroneous on merits, in that case, the remedy available to the assessee was to prefer an appeal before the High Court. Observing so, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Reliance Telecom Ltd. (supra), quashed the....