9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... risdictional High Court vide order [2014 (7) TMI 643 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], therefore, the very basis of filing the miscellaneous applications by the Revenue is no more in existence. Further the Revenue has already filed the appeals before the hon'ble High Court against the impugned order, therefore, when the issue is pending adjudication before the hon'ble High Court, it is not appropriate for this Tribunal to adjudicate the said issue in the miscellaneous applications. - There is no dispute that the impugned order sought to be rectified is a detailed and very elaborate reasoned order passed on merit and, therefore, the same cannot be reviewed or reversed under the provisions of section 254(2).- Decided against Revenue. - M. A. Nos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... une 24, 2014, in Writ Petition No. 126 of 2014 and, therefore, the miscellaneous applications filed by the Revenue have no basis and substance. The learned authorised representative has further submitted that even otherwise the issue for the assessment year 2005-06 is separate and independent from the issue involve for the assessment year 2004-05. He has received the order of the Tribunal dated January 30, 2013 for the assessment year 2004-05 and submitted that in paragraph 22, the Tribunal has observed that the earlier decision of the Tribunal dated December 30, 2011, is distinguishable. The learned authorised representative has submitted that the issue for the assessment year 2005-06 is regarding the capital gains of a separate and differ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uestion of facts or law and can be established by a long-drawn process and reasoning on the point to be rectified. It is settled proposition of law that a patent mistake which does not require any elaborate discussion of averment or argument to be established can be said to be an error patent on the face of record and can be rectified under the ambit of section 254(2). Section 254(2) does not confer power on the Tribunal to review its order passed on the merits and in the garb of rectification of mistake. No order can be passed under section 254(2) under the garb of rectification of mistake which amounts to reversal of the order passed after discussing of the facts and statutory provisions in details. There is no dispute that the impugned o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
