9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of Tribunal dated 19.03.2018 and the same is explained in para no. 2 (2.1 to 2.3) of the application and the same is reproduced below:- 2.1. In para 8 on page no 13 of the impugned order, the Honourable Tribunal while dealing with the ground of appeal no 2 for allowing indexation on the basis of the lette (of allotment dated 23.12.2004 given by the builder in place of allowing indexation on the basis of the year of payment of installments, has stated that the Appellant to evade tax, has claimed indexation on the purchase price Rs. 2,03,36,000 from financial year 2004-05, that is, from the date of the first payment instead of claiming it in accordance with the schedule of payment. It is further stated in the order that there is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a paper book of decisions and in support of this ground of appeal, cited the decisions at Sr nos 9 to 11. 2.3. The Honourable Tribunal in the impugned order has inadvertently, not acknowledged/ mentioned the contentions raised by the Authorised Representative in support of the ground of appeal no 2 and the decisions cited by him. 3. On the other hand, the learned D.R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that there is no error which is apparent from record and the impugned order dated 19.03.2018 is a well reasoned and speaking order and no rectification is required. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. From the record we noticed that Ld. AR had submitted a paper book of decisions in support o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In all these cases, the impugned conclusion should be so plainly inconsistent with the relevant statutory provision that no difficulty is experienced by the High Court in holding that the said error of law is apparent on the face of the record. It may also be that in some cases, the impugned error of law may not be obvious or patent on the face of the record as such and the Court may need an argument to discover the said error; but there can be no doubt that what can be corrected by a writ of certiorari is an error of law and the said error must, on the whole, be of such a character as would satisfy the test that it is an error of law apparent on the face of the record. If a statutory provision is reasonably capable of two constructions a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had in allowing the rectification application the Tribunal gave a finding that the earlier decision of a co-ordinate Bench was cited before it but through oversight it had missed the judgement while dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee on the question of admissibility/allowability of the claim of the assessee for enhanced depreciation under Section 43A. One of the important reasons for giving the power of rectification to the Tribunal under Section 254(2) was to see that no prejudice was caused to either of the parties appearing before it. The rule of precedent was an important aspect of certainty in the rule of law, and prejudice had resulted to the assessee since the precedent had not been considered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
