- (1.) THE following questions have been referred in this case: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in coming to the conclusion that there was no apparent mistake of law and facts in the order of the learned CIT (A) dated 3.2.1983 which could be rectified under Section 154(1)(b) and 154(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
(2.) WHETHER the observations of the Hon'ble Tribunal that there is a presumption embedded in the order of the CIT (Appeals) that when he made the earlier order there was no evidence before him to show from the record that the assessment was saved by limitation because of the concealment by the assessee are based on correct appreciation of evidence on record? Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessment made by the Income Tax officer on 13.3.1975 was barred by limitation. 2. In short, the first two questions above indicate the doubt (a) whether the order of the CIT (A) dated 3.2.1983 contained an error apparent on record which was capable of rectification under Section 154(1)(b) and 154(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961; or (b) whether in the garb of rectification, the CIT (A) had actually resorted to exercise of a power of review, which obviously he does not possess under the statute. 3. Apparently, where a decision has been arrived at after considering the relevant material and after appropriate reasoning, although the reasoning and consequently the conclusion may be mistaken on facts or on law; and where, to demonstrate the mistake of fact or of law it requires a process of detailed reasoning, it would not be a case of an error apparent on record capable of rectification under Section 154, but would virtually amount to review of the order.
(3.) IN the case of C.I.T. v. Hero Cycles Private Limited : [1997]228ITR463(SC) the Supreme Court held as follows: Rectification under Section 154 can only be made when a glaring mistake of fact or law committed by the officer passing the order becomes apparent from the record. Rectification is not possible if the question is debatable. Moreover a point which was not examined on facts or in law cannot be dealt with as a mistake apparent from the record.;