IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH C, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 9094/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 CHIKA PVT. LTD, 5 TH FLOOR, INDL ASSURANCE BUILDING, CHURCH GATE STATION, MUMBAI-400 020. PAN:- AAACC4609A VS. DCIT 1(1) MUMBAI-400 020. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI Y.N.THAKKAR REVENUE BY : SHRI M.RAJAN DATE OF HEARING : 11.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.02.2014 O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)) CONFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE AO REJECTING THE APP LICATION OF THE ASSESSEE MOVED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE, A COMPANY FILED A RECTIFICATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE AO VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 14.11.2008 FOR SET OFF OF MAT CREDIT AND ALSO FOR THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF TDS CREDIT OF RS.2,04,575/-. HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS REJECTED BY THE AO VIDE INTIMATION U/S 143(1) DATED 19.02.2002 AS THE RECTI FICATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS BEYOND THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED U/S 1 54(7) OF THE ACT. ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE DECISION OF THE AO AND AGGR IEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98, THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 30.06.2008 HAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF MAT CREDIT AMOUNTING TO RS.5,57,163/- AND THE ITA NO. 9094/MUM/2010 CHIKA PVT.LTD ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 2 SAID CREDIT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. SINCE THE SAID CREDIT HAS NOT BEEN UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE AS NO TAX HAS BEEN PAYABLE IN THE AYS 1998- 99 AND 1999-00, THE SAME WOULD GET CARRIED FORWARD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. SINCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS A RISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE LD.CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED THE AO TO ALLOW THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.AR HAS ALSO RELIED ON THE CBDT CIRCULAR TO THE EFFECT THAT THE AO SHOULD RECTIFY MISTAKES WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE ASS ESSEE TO POINT THEM OUT. FURTHER RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE DEL HI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS TONY ELECTRONICS LTD REPORTED IN 320 ITR 378. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD .DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND AO IN SUPPORT OF TH E REVENUES CASE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT SECTION 154(7) OF THE ACT LAYS DOWN TH E LIMITATION BY PROVIDING THAT NO AMENDMENT UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE MADE AFTER TH E EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER SOUGHT TO BE AMENDED. THE ASSESSEE, IN THIS CASE HAS FILED THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION BEFORE THE AO ON 14.11.2008 AND THE FOU R YEARS OF LIMITATION EXPIRED ON 31.03.2006. SINCE SECTION 154 OF THE ACT DOES NOT A UTHORIZE THE AO TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN ENTERTAINING THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION OF TH E ASSESSEE BEYOND 4 YEARS, THE CONTENTION OF THE LD.AR MENTIONED IN PARA 3 ABOVE, CANNOT RESC UE THE ASSESSEE FROM THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 154(7) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW O F THAT MATTER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE AO REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE THE SAME IS UPHELD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014. SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 11.02.2014. *SRIVASTAVA ITA NO. 9094/MUM/2010 CHIKA PVT.LTD ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR C BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.