TMI Blog1990 (12) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made in the ROM application. He has pleaded that the Tribunal has not given any finding regarding the rehabilitation aids for the handicapped and while disposing of the appeal, has not discussed the technical opinion from the experts filed by the applicant in its order. Shri Christian, Learned Advocate, also pleaded that while disposing of the appeal, the ground of para Nos. (I), (J), (K), (L) and (O) in the Appeal Memo could not be discussed by the Tribunal in its order. He has pleaded for the acceptance of the ROM application. In support of his argument, he has referred to a judgment of this Tribunal in the case of National Textile Corporation Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay reported in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 783 where the Tribunal had he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. We have looked into the order passed by us. We do not find any infirmity in the order while disposing of the appeal, we had duly looked into all the aspects. Further hearing of the arguments at this stage will be improper. Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of T.S. Balaram v. M/s. Volkart Brothers, Bombay reported in AIR/1971/Supreme Court/2204 1982/ITR/50 had held that where there have to be elaborate arguments, it cannot be taken as mistake apparent from the record. Para No. 8 from the said judgment is reproduced below: Para No. 8 : From what has been said above, it is clear that the question whether S. 17(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was applicable to the case of the first respondent is not free from doubt. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parent on the face of the record. In this case it is not necessary for us to spell out the distinction between expressions error apparent on the face of the record and mistake apparent from the record. But suffice it to say that the Income-tax Officer was wholly wrong in holding that there was a mistake apparent from the record of the assessments of the first respondent." In the matter before us if further observations have to be made, then the arguments have to be advanced by both the sides and the matter is fully covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of T.S. Balaram v. M/s. Volkart Brothers, and we hold that it is not a mistake apparent from record. The present ROM application is in the nature of a review applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
