2018 (7) TMI 2258 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake u/s 254 - HELD THAT - After considering rival submissions and perusing the papers on record, we find that the assessee in his 23 page objections, has parawise disputed the findings of the Tribunal. This can be done only in an appeal against the order of the Tribunal. The elaborate miscellaneous application and the contents in the same clearly demonstrate that the assessee seeks review of the order of the ITAT 2017 (11) TMI 1971 - ITAT KOLKATA We hold that there is not mistake apparent on record in the order of the Tribunal requiring rectification. This miscellaneous application of the assessee is dismissed as non-maintainable.

Summary

Issues:
Mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal's order for Assessment Year 2008-09.

The assessee filed a miscellaneous application before the ITAT Kolkata, claiming a mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal's order for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) had considered all facts and circumstances, allowing the appeal, and suggested that if the Tribunal found certain facts needed verification, it could have restored the appeals to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Revenue, represented by the ld. D/R, contended that the miscellaneous application was not maintainable as it sought a review of the Tribunal's own order, which is not provided for under the Act. The Tribunal noted that the assessee's objections disputed the findings of the Tribunal parawise, a process only permissible in an appeal against the Tribunal's order, not through a miscellaneous application seeking a review.

The Tribunal referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in a similar case, emphasizing that the Tribunal does not have the power to review its own order. The Court held that the Tribunal cannot rectify an issue already decided against the assessee, as it would amount to reviewing its own order, which is impermissible under Section 254(2) of the Act. The scope of Section 254(2) is limited to rectifying mistakes apparent from the record, not rehearing the appeal for a fresh disposal. The Tribunal concluded that there was no mistake apparent on record in the order requiring rectification, and therefore, dismissed the assessee's miscellaneous application as non-maintainable.

In summary, the ITAT Kolkata dealt with a miscellaneous application filed by the assessee, alleging a mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal's order for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The Tribunal rejected the application, citing that the assessee's objections were akin to seeking a review of the Tribunal's order, which is beyond the Tribunal's power under the Act. Referring to legal precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that rectification under Section 254(2) is limited to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and does not allow for a rehearing of the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application, stating that no mistake was evident on record necessitating rectification.