As per section 254(1), the Tribunal may, after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit.
Section 254(2) provides that the Tribunal may, at any time within six months from the end of the month in which the order was passed, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1), and shall make such amendment if the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee or the Assessing Officer.
As is clear from language in section 254(2), the mistake apparent in Order passed under section 254(1) can rectified by the Tribunal. The issue arises is whether Miscellenous Application (“MA”) can be filed against Order passed by Tribunal in earlier MA
This issue has been dealt in the following cases:
Padam Prakash (HUF) v ITO (ITAT – SB Delhi) (2011) 131 ITD 121, 9 taxmann.com 178 – The Tribunal held that S. 254 (2) can be invoked only if there is a mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal u/s 254(1). As the MA filed by the assessee is against an order passed u/s 254(2) it has to be rejected
CIT vs. President, ITAT 196 ITR 838 (Ori) – HC held that Order rejecting MA cannot be rectified u/s 254(2).
Mercedes Benz Education Academy TS-280-ITAT-2019(PUN) – The applicant (The Revenue) filed Miscellaneous Application against Miscellaneous Application. The ITAT held that MA is not maintainable as there is no provision in the Act to allow filing of Miscellaneous Application against an order passed by the Tribunal in Miscellaneous Application filed by assessee.
Honeywell Technology (Bang ITAT) MP NO 38/B/2014 – The ITAT held that no MA can be filed against MA.