The issue came up before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Supreme Industries Ltd. V/s. The Additional Commissioner of IncomeTax & Others. In this matter, the petitioner while while seeking to rectify an order made a mistake by referring to incorrect orders before relevant authority. The said authority passed an order referring to the orders (incorrect) asked for. However, when the petitioners realised their mistake filed an application for rectification/correction of the order, the Tribunal rejected the application stating that the proceeding under Section 254(2) of the Act are meant only for rectifying mistakes apparent from the record committed by the Tribunal and not the mistake of the parties concerned. The petitioners appealed against the said order. Held by the High Court: (i) It is a settled position in law that every authority exercising quasi judicial powers has inherent/ incidental power in discharging of its functions to ensure that justice is ...
We are a full service law firm and this blog as well as our website is an effort towards making the public aware of their rights