आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मंजुनाथा, जी., लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member M.P. No. 103/Chny/2023 [In M.P. No. 53/Chny/2020] [In I.T.A. No.1272/Chny/2018] Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. Vs. M/s. East Coast Constructions & Industries Limited, Buhari Buildings, No. 4, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. [PAN: AAACE1662P] (Petitioner) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) Petitioner by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri I Dinesh, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.10.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By means of present Miscellaneous Petition, the Revenue seeks to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 1272/Chny/2018 dated 22.08.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The ld. DR relied on the petition and submitted that the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that the tax effect was below ₹.50 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. It was M.P. No.103/Chny/23 2 further submission that the Revenue Audit Party objection has been accepted by the Department, it was prayed that the order of the Tribunal may be recalled and restored for fresh adjudication. 3. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the present second miscellaneous petition filed by the Department is not maintainable since the first Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Revenue against the appeal order dated 22.08.2019 has been dismissed for want of evidence for acceptance of the objections of the RAP. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the order of the Tribunal passed in M.P. No. 53/Chny/2020 dated 28.10.2022 towards recalling the order passed in I.T.A. No. 1272/Chny/2018 dated 22.08.2019, wherein, the Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous petition since the Revenue could not brought on record the evidence for acceptance of the objections of the RAP. Now, by filing the copy of the acceptance of RAP audit objection, the Revenue is seeking to recall and restore the appeal for fresh adjudication. However, section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] empowers the Tribunal to amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1) of section 254 of the M.P. No.103/Chny/23 3 Act with a view to recall/rectify/modify any mistake apparent from the record. To attract the applicability of section 254(2) of the Act, the mistake which is sought to be rectified or modified must be apparent from the record and the same must be in any order passed under sub-section (1) of section 254 of the Act. An order passed in the Miscellaneous Petition seeking further modification/rectification or recalling under section 254(2) of the Act is not an order passed under section 254(1) of the Act and it cannot be recalled or modified or rectified under section 254(2) of the Act. In view of the above facts, the present petition filed by the Department is dismissed. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous petition filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13 th October, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA, G.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 13.10.2023 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.