ITAT dismissed petition u/s 254(2) as there was no mistake apparent from record

1. The Tribunal had confirmed the levy of penalty under the provisions of sec.271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961.

2. The assessee filed a Miscellaneous petition before the Tribunal seeking rectification of mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal.

3. The ITAT held as under:

“The plain meaning of the word "apparent" is that it must be something which appears to be ex facie and incapable of argument and debate. If such a "mistake apparent on the face of record" is brought to the notice, s. 254(2) empowers the Tribunal to amend the order passed under s. 254(1).

Amendment of an order does not mean obliteration of the order originally passed and its substitution by a new order. What is mistake apparent on the face of the record or where does a mistake cease to be mere mistake, and become mistake apparent on the face of the record is rather difficult to define precisely, scientifically and with certainty. An element of indefiniteness inherent in its very nature and it must be discernible from the facts of each case by judiciously trained mind. Mere existence of a mistake or error would not per se render the order amenable for rectification, but such a mistake must be one which must be manifest on the face of the record".

Applying the above legal proposition to the facts of the present case, it is crystal clear that there is no mistake apparent from record which is capable of being rectified by exercising the power vested u/s 254(2) of the IT Act, 1961. Hence, the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the assessee is dismissed.”

Case Reference - Sri Muninaga Reddy v Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

'B' BENCH, BANGALORE

BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M.A.No.62/Bang/2015

( In ITA Nos.859/Bang/2012)

(Assessment years : 2006-07)