1. The department through this Miscellaneous Application has requested for the re-calling of the order of this Tribunal dated 7.8.2007 passed in the ITA No. 7438/LB/2005 (Assessment year 2002- 03) on the following grounds:-- "That the ITAT has held that the return for the year 2002-3 falls within the ambit of SAS but the learned ITAT has not adjudicated the departmental ground regarding setting apart and selection for total audit as the assessee has suppressed receipts/income.
2. That the learned ITAT has not appreciated the facts of the case on merits.
3. That the mistake is apparent from record hence, liable to rectification under Section 221 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001."
4. We have heard the learned representatives from both the sides and have also perused the above- referred order of this Tribunal dated 7.8.2007 and the other relevant record of the case. We have found that on behalf of the assessee no apparent mistake floating from the order of this Tribunal or. The record of the case has been pointed out by the applicant/department.
5. On behalf of the respondent/assessee it has been contended that there is no provision in the Ordinance to review the order passed by this Tribunal and the order once decided on merits, cannot be re-called except there is a glaring and- apparent mistake in the order or the order has been passed without affording the reasonable opportunity of being heard but in the present case the above-referred order has been passed after hearing the learned representatives from both the sides. The learned counsel has contended that this Tribunal in the above-referred order has upheld the treatment meted out by the learned CIT(A) against which no rectification application was filed before the learned CIT(A) as there was no mistake apparent from the record. The learned counsel in this regard has placed reliance on the decision of the Indian Supreme Court reported as (1976)
6. 34 Tax 133 (S.C. Ind.) wherein it has been held that:- "A mistake apparent on the record must be an obvious and patent mistake and not something which can be established by a long drawn process, It has further been, held that where there may conceivably be two opinions cannot be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record and a decision on debatable point of law is not a mistake apparent from the record."
7. After considering all the facts of the case and the legal position, we find no-merits in the application filed by the applicant/department which is, therefore, dismissed.