{"id":258124,"date":"2021-12-05T10:00:31","date_gmt":"2021-12-05T04:30:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=258124"},"modified":"2021-12-10T15:50:09","modified_gmt":"2021-12-10T10:20:09","slug":"explained-can-itat-recall-an-order-while-exercising-powers-under-section-2542-of-the-income-tax-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/05\/explained-can-itat-recall-an-order-while-exercising-powers-under-section-2542-of-the-income-tax-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Explained| Can ITAT recall an order while exercising powers under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act?\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: Explaining the scope of jurisdiction of ITAT, the bench of MR Shah<\/strong>* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that the powers under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act are only to correct and\/or rectify the mistake apparent from the record and not beyond that.<\/p>\n

In the present case, a detailed order was passed by the ITAT when it passed an order on 06.09.2013, by which the ITAT held in favour of the Revenue. The said order was then recalled on 18.11.2016. It is pertinent to note that the order was recalled while exercising the power under Section 254(2) of the Act as the Assessee had filed miscellaneous application for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act. While allowing the application under Section 254(2) of the Act and recalling its earlier order dated 06.09.2013, the ITAT had re-heard the entire appeal on merits as if the ITAT was deciding the appeal against the order passed by the C.I.T.<\/p>\n

It was argued before the Court that the Revenue itself had in detail gone into merits of the case before the ITAT and the parties filed detailed submissions based on which the ITAT passed its order recalling its earlier order. The Court, however, rejected the said contention and held that,<\/p>\n

\u201cMerely because the Revenue might have in detail gone into the merits of the case before the ITAT and merely because the parties might have filed detailed submissions, it does not confer jurisdiction upon the ITAT to pass the order de hors Section 254(2) of the Act.\u201d<\/p>\n

In exercise of powers under Section 254(2) of the Act, the Appellate Tribunal may amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1) of Section 254 of the Act with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record only. Therefore, the powers under Section 254(2) of the Act are akin to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC<\/em>. While considering the application under Section 254(2) of the Act, the Appellate Tribunal is not required to re-visit its earlier order and to go into detail on merits<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Further, if the Assessee was of the opinion that the order passed by the ITAT was erroneous, either on facts or in law, in that case, the only remedy available to the Assessee was to prefer the appeal before the High Court.<\/p>\n

Therefore, it was held that the order passed by the ITAT recalling its earlier order dated 06.09.2013 which has been passed in exercise of powers under Section 254(2) of the Act is beyond the scope and ambit of the powers of the Appellate Tribunal conferred under Section 254 (2) of the Act.<\/p>\n

[Commissioner of Income Tax v. Reliance Telecom Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1170<\/b><\/a>, decided on 03.12.2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Counsels<\/strong><\/p>\n

For Revenue: Additional Solicitor General Balbir Singh<\/p>\n

For Respondent: Advocate Anuj Berry<\/p>\n

\n

*Judgment by: Justice MR Shah<\/strong><\/p>\n

Know Thy Judge | Justice M. R. Shah<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n