Held that on the date when the Tribunal had passed the initial order dismissing the appeal of the assessee there was a binding decision of the court in Utanka Roy v. DIT (IT)(2017) 390 ITR 109 (Cal)(HC) which the Tribunal could not have ignored. The Tribunal having ignored it there was an error which was apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal ought to have exercised its power when the rectification application was filed by the assessee but had erroneously rejected it. Therefore, the said order dated January 5, 2018 also suffered from perversity. On merit the matter remanded to Assessing Officer. Circular No 13 of 2017 dated 11-4-2017(2017) 393 ITR 91 (St), Circular No. 14 (XL)-35. dated April, 11, 1955, CIT v. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co Ltd (1986) 160 ITR 920 (SC) (AY.2012-13)
Rajeev Biswas v. UOI (2023)459 ITR 36 /(2022) 143 taxmann.com 3 (Cal)(HC)
S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Failure to apply judicial precedents and Circular issued by Central Board Of Direct Taxes-Error apparent on face of record-Tribunal has jurisdiction to rectify the mistake. [S.10(6)(viii), 143(1), 260A]