"1 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT आयकर अपीलȣय Ûयायाͬधकरण मɅ, हैदराबाद ‘ए’ बɅच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Įी मंजूनाथ जी., माननीय लेखा सदèय एवं Įी रवीश सूद, माननीय ÛयाǓयक सदèय SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.95/Hyd/2025 (In आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.582/Hyd/2025 (Ǔनधा[रण वष[/ Assessment Year:2019-20) Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna, R/o. Nampally, Hyderabad. PAN: AAETS4159A Deputy Commissioner of Income- Tax, Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलाथȸ/ Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/ Respondent) करदाता का ĤǓतǓनͬध×व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri Y Ratnakar, Advocate and Shri B Satyanarayana, CA राजèव का ĤǓतǓनͬध×व/ Department Represented by : Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR सुनवाई समाÜत होने कȧ Ǔतͬथ/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 30/01/2026 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 30/04/2026 O R D E R RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present miscellaneous application has been filed by the assessee society under Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), seeking rectification of certain mistakes allegedly apparent from the record in Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 582/Hyd/2025 dated 07.07.2025 for the subject year. 2. The assessee society has, in its application, pointed out certain factual discrepancies in the Tribunal’s order, primarily relating to the dates of correspondence between the assessee and the then Commissioner of Income- tax, Andhra Pradesh-II, Hyderabad (for short, “CIT”), and also claimed that certain explanations of the assessee society have not been considered by the Tribunal while disposing of the appeal. 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative (for short, “AR”) for the assessee society at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that there are apparent mistakes in Para Nos. 8 and 9 of the order passed by the Tribunal, specifically with respect to the date of the letter issued by the Ld. CIT and the chronology of events. It is further submitted that the Tribunal had not taken into account the assessee society's explanation regarding the condonation of delay, nor the circumstances under which the application for registration was filed. 4. Per Contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short, “DR”), on the other hand, submitted that the assessee society, under the garb of rectification, is seeking a review of the order passed by the Tribunal, which is beyond the scope of Section 254(2) of the Act. It was contended that there is no apparent mistake in the record, and the issues raised were duly considered by the Tribunal while passing the original order. Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT 5. We have heard the Ld. The Authorized Representatives of both parties, perused the Tribunal's order and the material available on record. 6. At the threshold, we may herein observe that the scope of rectification under Section 254(2) is limited to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be extended to review or re-appreciation of evidence or re-arguing the matter. 7. Coming to the alleged discrepancies pointed out by the assessee society in its application, we deem it apposite to chronologically deal with the same as culled out in the miscellaneous application, as under: (i). Serial No. 2 : The assessee society has claimed that though the Tribunal at Para No. 8 has observed that the letter was received from the CIT as on 23/08/1991, but the said letter mentioned at Para 8 of the Tribunal’s order dated 07/07/2025 was received on 23/03/1991. We have perused the record (Page 37 of “Paper book”) and find the aforesaid claim of the assessee society to be correct. Accordingly, the aforesaid mistake is rectified, and the date of the subject letter may hereinafter be read as 23/03/1991. However, the aforesaid date of the letter of the CIT will not have any bearing on the view taken by the Tribunal and render its order as suffering from a mistake apparent from the record, making it amenable to rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act. We say so because the Tribunal's finding was primarily based on the fact that the assessee society had failed to furnish reasons for delay and did not seek Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT condonation, as specifically required by the Ld. CIT, and that there was no valid application pending in law. Serial No. 3: The assessee society has claimed that the Tribunal, at Para No. 8 of its order, observed that the letter dated 23/3/1991 was received on 23/08/1991, whereas the same was received on 27/5/1992. We have perused the record and find no such observation is recorded by the Tribunal at Para 8 or anywhere in the order. Apart from that, we are unable to comprehend how the said claim of the assessee society will render the order passed by the Tribunal as suffering from a mistake apparent from the record, making it amenable to rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act. Serial No. 5: The assessee society has claimed that the Tribunal had omitted to consider the condonation of the delay sought by the assessee society vide its letter dated 19/4/1991, filed on 01/05/1991. It is stated that the Tribunal erred in observing that the assessee society has not filed any application for condonation of delay. We have perused the record and are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the aforesaid claim of the assessee. The Tribunal at Para 7 to 9 of its order, had observed that the assessee society on 01.05.1991, filed an application in “Form No. 10A” read with Rule 17A with the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Andhra Pradesh-II, Hyderabad, seeking registration under Section 12A of the Act. Since the application was filed beyond the prescribed time, the assessee society, in its covering letter, requested condonation of the delay, stating that it had remained under the impression that it was not entitled Printed from counselvise.com 5 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT to exemption under Section 11 of the Act. Thereafter, the Tribunal had observed that the CIT-II, Hyderabad, vide his letter dated 23.08.1991, pointed out certain defects in the application and specifically, under Para 2 of his letter, directed the assessee society to submit reasons for the delayed filing of the application and to make a request for condonation of the same. However, the assessee society responded to the above communication only on 28.10.1993, i.e., after a lapse of more than two years. Moreover, despite specific instructions, the assessee society neither furnished the reasons for the delay in filing the application under Section 12A of the Act, nor made any request for condonation of the delay. Thereafter, no further correspondence took place, and the Ld. CIT did not pass any order, either accepting or rejecting the application. Serial No. 6 : The assessee society has claimed that the Tribunal, as per Para 9 of its order, had omitted to consider the explanation of the assessee as to why the renewal was submitted as a fresh application, i.e., the software of the department did not permit the application without full details of the earlier Registration. In our view, the contention of the assessee society that the Tribunal had omitted to consider its explanation regarding condonation of delay is not borne out by the record. We find that the Tribunal, in its order, categorically observed that, despite specific directions from the Ld. CIT (Exemption), the assessee society, had neither furnished the reason for the delay nor made any request for condonation. The said finding is based on the Printed from counselvise.com 6 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT appreciation of facts already available on record, and the same cannot be revisited under Section 254(2) of the Act. 8. Apropos the other contentions raised by the assessee society, including alleged omission to consider explanations and factual aspects, we are of the view that the assessee society, in the garb of its said claim, is seeking a review of the Tribunal’s order, which is not permissible under Section 254(2) of the Act. As observed by us hereinabove, it is a settled position of law that a mistake apparent from record must be obvious, patent, glaring, and apparent from record, and not something which requires long-drawn reasoning or re- appreciation of evidence. We are of firm conviction that the assessee society in the present case has failed to point out any such mistake which would render the order passed by it while disposing of the appeal amenable for rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act. 9. We thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, are of the considered view that as there is no mistake apparent from the record in the order of the Tribunal dated 07.07.2025 warranting rectification under Section 254(2) of the Act, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee society does not merit acceptance and is accordingly rejected. 10. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee society is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Printed from counselvise.com 7 MA No.95/Hyd/2025 Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna vs. DCIT Order pronounced in the open court on 30th April, 2026. Sd/- SSd/-d/- (मंजूनाथ जी) (MANJUNATHA G.) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- S Sd/-d/- (रवीश सूद) (RAVISH SOOD) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER … Sd/- Hyderabad, dated 30/04/2026. Okk/sps आदेशकȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. Ǔनधा[ǐरती/The Assessee : Sri Modh Visa Gowbhuja Sajna; 4-4-334, Girirajlane, Bank Street, Puthbowli, S.O. Nampally – 500095, Hyderabad. 2. राजèव/ The Revenue : Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle – 1 (1), Hyderabad. 5. ͪवभागीयĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6. गाड[फ़ाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad Printed from counselvise.com KAMALA KUMAR ORUGANTI Digitally signed by KAMALA KUMAR ORUGANTI Date: 2026.04.30 15:58:45 +05'30' "