Dismissing the petition the Court held that the Appellate Tribunal, in its own way, had discussed qua ground No. 3 issue relating to the addition made on account of suppression in the value of closing stock and had recorded a particular finding. If the assessee was dissatisfied, then it had to prefer an appeal under section 260A and if the court was convinced then it could remit the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of ground No. 3. As regards the findings recorded by the Tribunal, so far as ground No. 3 was concerned, the assessee could seek appellate remedies. The power to rectify an order under section 254(2) is limited. Referred  Master Construction co. (P) Ltd. v. State of Orissa  (1966) 17 STC 360 (SC) and  Satyanarayan laxminarayan Hegde v. Mallikarjun Bhavanappa  Tirumale (1960) AIR 1960 SC 137.