VINEET KOTHARI,J. - (1.) The Revenue has filed these appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, aggrieved by the order dated 28.08.2009, dismissing the Revenue's appeals against the assessee M/s.United India Insurance Company Employees Pension Fund, Chennai. The relevant portion of the order of the learned Tribunal is quoted below for ready reference: "5. Now the Revenue has disputed this finding of the ld.CIT(A). The main crux of the arguments as advanced by the ld.CIT(DR) is that the assessee has not claimed exemption of its entire income from tax under any specific section of the Act. The other argument of the Department is that the assessee trust has sought registration under Section 12A despite having obtained approval of the required authority under Part-B of Schedule IV of the Act, which was obtained way back in the year 1996. The objection of the ld.CIT(DR) is that u/s.10(23AAA) renewal of approval once in three years is required to be obtained, which has not been done, hence no exemption is eligible to the assessee-trust. 6. After hearing the rival versions, it was found for a fact that the assessee has already obtained approval u/s 10(23AAA) as back as in 1996. the assessee was also registered u/s 12A of the Act, subsequently. Now the moot question arises for our adjudication is if the assessee is registered u/s 10(23AAA) as well as under Section 12A of the Act, but its entire income is not taxable u/s 10(25)(iii), according to which entire income received by the trustee on behalf of an approved Superannuation Fund is exempt, would the factum of such registration throw the assessee-trust out of the legislative benefit. According to us, it is not correct proposition and construction of law. If an assessee is eligible for any specific exemption, even if it has not mentioned any specific Section or has mentioned a wrong section, it would not debar it from the benefit of a specific exemption. Rather, it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to apply correct provisions of the law. It is found that in so far as the facts of the case are concerned, there is no dispute at all. In our opinion also, the assessee is entitled to the exemption u/s 10(25)(iii) of the Act. Hence, we confirm the impugned finding of the ld.CIT(A) and cannot allow these appeals of the Revenue. 7.In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. 8. The order pronounced in the open Court on 28.08.09."
(2.) The learned counsel for the Revenue urged before us that since no specific provision, under which the approval was obtained in respect of the respondent assessee Trust fund, was mentioned at the time of filing of the return and the approval granted under Part-B of Schedule-IV of the Act requires renewal after three years and since the said approval was not renewed, the assessee was not entitled to the exemption.
(3.) The learned for the assessee, however, submitted that Rule 2 of part-B of Schedule IV of the Act does not require any such renewal every three years and since the said Trust Fund of the respondent assessee was duly approved under Part-B Schedule-IV of the Act, the exemption claimed by the assessee under Section 10(25)(iii) of the Act could not have been denied by the respondent Revenue authorities.;