आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No. 20/Chd/2020 (Arising out of आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 999/CHD/2019 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The ACIT, Circle-3(1), Chandigarh बनाम Asian Concretes and Cements Pvt. Ltd. SCF 270, Motor Market, Manimajra èथायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAHCA7913J अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Ǔनधा[ǐरतीकȧओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राजèवकȧओरसे/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR स ु नवाईकȧतारȣख/Date of Hearing : 15.09.2023 उदघोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2023 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain, Vice President: This is Departmental Application in ITA No. 999/Chd/2019 for A.Y. 2011-12 (incorrectly mentioned by the Revenue in its Application as ‘ITA No. 815/Chd/2018 for assessment year 2012-13’ ), which was dismissed vide common order passed by the Tribunal dated 5.9.2019, in a group of cases, for tax effect. MA. No.20/Chd/2020 in ITA 999-Chd-2019 - Asian Concretes and Cements ltd, Manimajra 2 2. The Department contends that the Tribunal, without going into the merits of the case, has dismissed the appeal of the Department due to low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8.8.2019. Now, it has been submitted by the ld. Departmental Representative (DR) that, in this case, an audit objection was raised pointing out that during the assessment year under consideration, the Assessee company had paid tax under sub-section (1) of section 115JB and as such MAT Credit was allowable as carry forward, however, the Assessee company was wrongly allowed carry forward of MAT credit of higher amount which was inclusive of levies, viz., surcharge / cess. It was a mistake apparent from the record and an order u/s 154, being a remedial action, was passed and the Assessee was allowed the carry forward MAT credit as per the provisions of tax credit u/s 115JJA, i.e., only the tax amount was allowed to be carry forward to the next year. 2.1 It is conceded by the ld. DR that the aforesaid fact could not be brought to the notice of the Bench during the course of hearing and, as such, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to tax effect but this fact is now been noticed that the case falls under the exception 10 (c) laid down in the amended circular of CBDT dated 20.8.20218 and that this being so, irrespective of the low tax effect, the matter needs to be contested on merits. MA. No.20/Chd/2020 in ITA 999-Chd-2019 - Asian Concretes and Cements ltd, Manimajra 3 3. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand, has placed strong reliance on the order of the Tribunal dated 4.6.2019 (supra). It has been contended that the facts pointed out in the Application of the Revenue had not been brought to the notice of the Bench at the time of hearing of the appeal and, therefore, no arguments took place on this aspect and the appeal of the Revenue was rightly dismissed by the Tribunal. There is no apparent mistake on the record and, moreover, the Revenue has not brought any evidence on record to support its claim, nor had argued the stand which has now been taken by the Revenue at this juncture, therefore, the application of the Revenue is liable to be rejected. 4. We have heard the parties and have perused the material on record. 4.1 We find that the Revenue authorities, during the course of hearing of the appeal, neither had argued the issue on merits, nor the Revenue had submitted any documentary evidence in support of its claim which has now been claimed before the Tribunal through this Application. We find force in the submission raised by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the Revenue authorities had failed to put forth any argument on the merits of the case during the course of hearing. Had the Revenue pointed out any particular fact or raised the issue on merits, the issue would have been dealt with accordingly. MA. No.20/Chd/2020 in ITA 999-Chd-2019 - Asian Concretes and Cements ltd, Manimajra 4 Furthermore, we find that the Revenue, through this Application, seeks a review of the order of the Tribunal which, as per law, is not permissible. 5. Therefore, in the absence of any argument on merits of the case, and considering the totality of facts and circumstances, we find that there is no force in the application filed by the Department and the same is liable to be rejected. It is ordered so, accordingly. 6. In the result, the Application filed by the Department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21.09.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member Vice President Dated : 21 .09.2023 “आर.के.” आदेशकȧĤǓतͧलͪपअĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआय ु Èत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीयĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकरअपीलȣयआͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar