TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 1411
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ake of clarity the contents of the Miscellaneous Application is reproduced which reads as under : "The Hon'ble ITAT, Pune, in ITA No. 672/PN/2009 for A.Y. 2005-06 has passed an order dated 31-05-2011, wherein a mistake apparent from record has occurred. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs.1,84,65,940/- to the total income of the assessee denying exemption u/s.10(23C)(vi) of the IT Act 1961 since it is not notified u/s 10(23C)(vi). The addition on this account made by the AO was upheld by the learned CIT(A)-I Pune in first appeal. The Hon'ble ITAT has however decided the appeal in favour of assessee and set aside the orders of the authorities below, directing AO to frame assessment for the year afresh treating the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....application for approval of the claimed exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Act has been allowed by the Id. Chief Commissioner to frame the assessment for the AY in question accordingly. ........ " 3. The Hon'ble ITAT decided the appeal in favour of assessee granting deemed approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act and setting aside the orders of the authorities below and directing AO to frame assessment afresh treating the appellant as enjoying approval of exemption u/s.10(23C) for the claimed period in its application. 4. From the combined reading of above paras it is clear that Hon'ble ITAT's order is based on the premise that an application was made to the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax on 13.03.2006. However, fact is not so. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n filed in the office of CIT-V, Pune u/s.10(23C) of the I.T. Act. He submitted that the Tribunal after considering the entire facts of the case has passed the order. Therefore, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue amounts to a request to the Tribunal to review its own order which is not permissible under the law. He accordingly submitted that the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue has to be dismissed. 4. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides. The grievance of the Revenue through this Miscellaneous Application is that the assessee has not filed any application in the office of the CCIT on 13- 03-2006. From the various pages of the paper book, we find the assessee has filed the application i....