RAM RATTAN, A.M. Assessee s appeal in ITA No. 48 of 1980 relating to asst. yr. 1977-78 was disposed of by Bench vide its order dt. 31st Aug., 1981. assessee has now moved miscellaneous petition against above order stating that assessee had claimed investment allowance of Rs. 1,05,035 on addition of machinery of Rs. 4,20,140 calculated at 25 per cent for being carried forward under s. 72A to be adjusted against income in subsequent years. note to this effect was given in depreciation chart annexed along with return of income. assessee in its statement of statutory assessable income annexed with return deducted investment allowance reserve amounting to Rs. 78,776 for separate consideration. He has further pointed out that ITO in assessment order dt. 28th March, 1979 deducted amount of Rs. 78,776 on account of investment allowance for separate consideration but did not allow investment allowance under s. 32A for reasons given in assessment order. It has, therefore, been stated that he wrongly mentioned amount of investment allowance at Rs. 78,778 in place of Rs. 1,05,035 which is actual allowable towards investment allowance as amount of Rs. 78,776 represented investment allowance reserve created in books of account being 75 per cent of actual allowable investment allowance. On appeal, AAC disallowed investment allowance and on further appeal, Tribunal allowed claim of assessee but figure adopted was Rs. 78,776. assessee has now moved miscellaneous petition against above order of Tribunal praying that investment allowance was allowable at Rs. 1,05,035 instead of Rs. 78,776. learned Counsel for assessee, therefore, urged that this being mistake apparent from record should be rectified and investment allowance be ordered to be allowed at Rs. 1,05,035 instead of Rs. 78,776. departmental representative has opposed miscellaneous petition. It has been contended that before ITO, assessee had claimed investment allowance at Rs. 78,776 only which was allowed by Tribunal. There was, therefore, no mistake apparent from record. We have considered rival submissions. It is true that ITO considered investment allowance at Rs. 78,776. same figure was considered by AAC and Tribunal. orders of authorities below have merged with order of Tribunal Technically speaking, there is no mistake either in order of Tribunal or lower authorities as claim made by assessee was Rs. 78,776. At same time, it cannot be denied that investment allowance due is Rs. 1,05,035 being 25 per cent of value of machinery. One of conditions is that assessee should create reserve equivalents to 75 per cent of investment allowance admissible. That reserve has been created by assessee and debited to profit and loss account. only mistake committed by assessee at that time was that he should have debited entire claim and not 75 per cent thereof. These are factual mistake and, therefore, in our opinion, they need to be corrected. We accordingly, direct ITO to allow investment allowance at Rs. 1,05,035 instead of Rs. 78,776 earlier allowed by Tribunal. order of Tribunal, therefore, stands modified accordingly. In result, miscellaneous petition is allowed. *** KRISHNA COLD STORAGE v. INCOME TAX OFFICER