Some useful judgements on scope of rectification u/s 154.
(I) The term “record” means record of all proceedings leading to framing of assessment order. The following case laws explain this proposition:-
(a) Maharana Mills (P) Ltd vs. ITO (1959)(36 ITR 350)(SC)
(b) Gammon India vs. CIT (1995)(214 ITR 50)(Bom)
(c) Upasana Hospital and Nursing Home vs. CIT (253 ITR 507)(Kerala)
(II) If the AO does not look at entire record or an important material or fact, which was brought to his notice, then the same can be rectified and order can be altered:-
(a) ITO vs. ITAT (1964)(58 ITR 634)(All)
(b) CIT vs. Mithalal Ashok Kumar (1984)(158 iTR 755)
(c) Laxmi Electronic Corporation vs. CIT (1990)(188 ITR 398)(All)
(III) Non-consideration of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court or Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is an error apparent from record and must be rectified.
ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (2008)(305 ITR 227)(SC).
(IV) If an order has been passed on mistaken assumption and without considering the materials available on record, then it deserves to be rectified.
(a) Neeta Shah and Ors vs. CIT (191 ITR 77)(Kar)
(b) Kesoram Industries Ltd vs. CIT (271 ITR 501)(Cal)
(V) A rectification is maintainable in order to correctly decide an issue as per law. If it is apparent from record that the assessee is entitled to a particular relief, then the same is allowable by way of rectification u/s 154 of the Act.
(a) CIT vs. Ballabh Prasad Agarwalla (233 ITR 354)(Cal)
(b) CIT vs. K.N. Oil Industries (142 ITR 13)(MP)