IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT MP NO.70/BANG/2019 [IN ITA NO. 2312/BANG/2018] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 - 13 SMT. SHANTIBAI DEEPCHAND SANGHVI TRUST, # 300/1, CHAMRAJPET, DAVANGERE 588 001. P AN: AAATS 4608Q VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), DAVANGERE. APP L IC ANT RESPONDENT APP ELLANT BY : SHRI ZAIN AH MED KHAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G ANESH R. WH OGLE, STANDING COU NSEL DATE O F HEARING : 30.08.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09. 2019 O R D E R THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE U/S.254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT) PRAYING FOR RECTIFIC ATION OF CERTAIN ALLEGEDLY APPARENT ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 7 .9.2018 PASSED IN THE AFORESAID APPEAL BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 2. A TRUST OR OTHER INSTITUTION ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM E XEMPTION U/S.11 OF THE ACT, IS ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE UPTO 15% OF THE INCO ME EARNED DURING THE YEAR FOR APPLICATION FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PU RPOSES IN INDIA IN FUTURE. IF THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO ACCUMULATE OR SET APART THE I NCOME IN ADDITION TO 15% OF THE INCOME, HE CAN DO SO IF CERTAIN CONDITIO NS ARE SATISFIED. SUCH MP NO.70/BANG/2019 PAGE 2 OF 3 INCOME SO ACCUMULATED, OR SET APART, IS NOT INCLUDE D IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE TRUST IN THE YEAR OF RECEIPT OF INCOME. FOR TH IS PURPOSE, SUCH TRUST HAS TO INFORM THE CONCERNED ASSESSING OFFICER THE PURPO SE AND PERIOD (WHICH IN NO CASE CAN EXCEED 5 YEARS) FOR WHICH THE INCOME IS ACCUMULATED OR SET APART. THIS INFORMATION HAS TO BE GIVEN IN FORM NO. 10. IN FORM NO.10, THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE INCOME IS BEING ACCUMULATED O R SET APART HAS TO BE SPECIFIED. 3. THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH INCOME IS BEING ACCUMULATED WAS N OT PROPERLY STATED IN FORM NO.10 AND ON THAT SCORE THE CLAIM FOR ACCUMULA TION WAS REJECTED AND THE SUM SOUGHT TO BE ACCUMULATED BEYOND 15% OF THE INCOME WAS BROUGHT TO TAX BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 4. IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS IN ITS ORDER MENTIONED THAT FORM NO.10 WAS NOT FILED WITH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE TRIBUNAL, BUT HAS OMITTED TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT FORM NO.10 WAS FILED ALONG WITH THE APPEA L MEMORANDUM. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT FORM NO.10 CLEARLY SPECIFI ES THE PURPOSE AND THEREFORE THE TRIBUNAL OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED ACCUMU LATION AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE TRIBUNALS C ONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO ACCUMULATION IS NOT BAS ED ON THE NON-FURNISHING OF FORM NO.10 ALONG WITH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FI LED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW OF THE REV ENUE AUTHORITIES THAT THE PURPOSE OF ACCUMULATION HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY STATE D BY THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE IN A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION TO RECONSI DER A PLEA THAT THE PURPOSE OF ACCUMULATION IS PROPERLY SET OUT IN FORM NO.10, AS THE MP NO.70/BANG/2019 PAGE 3 OF 3 TRIBUNALS POWER U/S.254(2) OF THE ACT IS ONLY TO R ECTIFY ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND CANNOT REVIEW THE ORDER ALREADY PASSED. 6. FOR THE REASONS GIVEN ABOVE, THE MISCELLANEOUS P ETITION IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 4 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019. SD/- ( N.V . VASUDEVAN ) VICE PRESIDENT BANGALORE, DATED, THE 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019. / D ESAI S MURTHY / COPY TO: 1. APP L IC ANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FIL E BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.