"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member M.A. Nos. 139 & 140/Chny/2025 [In I.T.A. Nos.554 & 555/Chny/2025] िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: - Gnanaratna Charitable Trust, C-1, Kottur Villa, 5, Lockstreet, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 085. [PAN:AABTG9631J] Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Varun Nahar, CA ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: By way of these Miscellaneous Applications, the assessee intends to modify the consolidated order of the Tribunal dated 30.04.2025 passed in ITA Nos. 554 and 555/Chny/2025. 2. The ld. AR Shri Varun Nahar, CA drew our attention to para 6 of the impugned order and submits that considering the submissions of the ld. AR as well as material evidence placed at page 1 and page 5 of Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.139 & 140/Chny/25 2 the paper book, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh consideration and pass order in accordance with law. He prayed to modify the consolidated order of the Tribunal by giving a direction to treat assessee’s application filed in Form 10AB, as an application filed in Form 10A for the purposes of section 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] as well as for the purpose of section 80G(5) of the Act. 3. The ld. DR Ms. Kavitha, Addl. CIT opposed the same and relied on the order of the Tribunal. 4. Upon hearing both the parties and on perusal of the miscellaneous applications, it is noted that the assessee given submissions on merits of the case, but, not pointing out mistake apparent on record in the impugned order. Therefore, the said submissions are not acceptable as the present application 254(2) of the Act filed seeking rectification of mistake apparent on record, but, however, in the miscellaneous application we find no such mistake pointed out by the ld. AR and therefore, the miscellaneous applications fails and both the miscellaneous applications are dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com M.A. Nos.139 & 140/Chny/25 3 5. In the result, both the miscellaneous applications filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on 04th December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 04.12.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "