9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome-tax Act, 1961, whereby the Tribunal has recalled its order dated August 7, 2003, passed in I. T. A. No. 151/Del/2000 and posted the said appeal for rehearing after notice to the parties. The controversy arises in the following circumstances 3 Shri Ratti Ram Gotewala was along with his family members carrying on business in sarees at Delhi and Calcutta. He was a partner in M/s. Rati Ram Ram Vinod and M/s Rati Ram Ram Vinod and Company, besides being a director in M/s. Rati Ram Saree Store Pvt. Ltd. He was also the proprietor of M/s. R. Rakesh Behari and Co. 4 A search was conducted at the residential and business premises of the group concerns mentioned above and various incriminating material including certain hundies depict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal has held that it had while disposing of the appeal failed to take note of a decision rendered by a three member Bench of the Tribunal at Allahabad in Dr. A. K. Bansal v. Asst . CIT [2001 247 ITR (AT) 54, holding that the Tribunal could examine the validity of a search in an appeal filed before it under the Income-tax Act. The second reason why the Tribunal recalled its order was that the issue whether an assessment under section 158BC could be framed on the basis of estimation was debatable. Both these grounds were according to the petitioner, insufficient to justify an order of recall having regard to the language employed in section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, which simply permits rectification of any mistake apparent fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal for a fresh disposal. Doing so would obliterate the distinction between the power to rectify mistakes and the power to review the order made by the Tribunal. The following passage from the decision of this court in Karan and Co. [2002] 253 ITR 131 elucidates the difference between review and rectification of an order made by the Tribunal (page 136) The scope and ambit of application of section 254(2) is very limited. The same is restricted to rectification of mistakes apparent from the record. We shall first deal with the question of the power of the Tribunal to recall an order in its entirety. Recalling the entire order obviously would mean passing of a fresh order. That does not appear to be the legislative intent. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct either by the Tribunal or by any other court was not noticed by the Tribunal while taking a particular view on the merits of the controversy may constitute an error that would call for correction in an appropriate appeal against the order. Any such error may however fall short of constituting a mistake apparent from the record within the meaning of section 254(2) of the Act. More importantly just because a point is debatable (which is one of the reasons given by the Tribunal in the instant case) could hardly provide a justification for recalling the order and fixing the appeal for a de novo hearing. While doing so, the Tribunal has no doubt made certain observations in regard to the levy of interest under section 158BFA being statutory i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
