IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( MISC. APPLICATION ) NO.28/KOL/2011 (A/O ITA NO.49/KOL/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR :2005-06 DCIT, CIRCLE-2, KOLKATA V/S . M/S MACMET INDIA LTD., KOLKATA [ PAN NO.AACCM 0804 B ] (ORIGINAL APPELLANT) (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT) /BY APPELLANT SHRI A.S.MONDAL, SR-DR /BY RESPONDENT SHRI D.S.DAMLE, AR /DATE OF HEARING 17-01-2014 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17-01-2014 / // / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- AS WE HAVE ALREADY PRONOUNCED CONNECTED MA IN MA NO .27/KOL/2011 VIDE ORDER DATED 17-01-2014 AND DUE TO MISTAKE ONLY ONE MA WAS DISPOSED OF AND THIS BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS ORDER. 2. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE REV ENUE HAS REQUESTED FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER OF ITAT IN ITA NO.49/KOL /2011 DATED 14-07-2011. MA NO.28/KOL/2013 (A/O ITA NO.49/KOL/2011) DCIT CIR-2, KOL V. M/S. MACMET INDIA LTD. PAGE 2 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. SR-DR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO T HIS MA AND STATED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE THAN RS.3 LAKHS. THE ISSUE R AISED IN THE PETITION READS AS UNDER:- IT IS APPARENT FROM PARA-3 OF THE ORDER OF ITAT TH AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LOSS RETURNED AND LOSS ASSESSED HAS BEE N TAKEN AS THE BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF TAX EFFECT, WHICH IS INCOR RECT. THE TAX EFFECT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF DIFFERE NCE BETWEEN THE LOSS ASSESSED AND LOSS AS PER CIT(A)S ORDER BECAUSE THE DEPTT. WAS IN APPEALS AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDERS. THE ACTUAL POTENTIAL TAX EFFECT FOR THE AYR. 2004-0 5 IS AS UNDER:- A.Y LOSS ASSESSED LOSS AS PER APPEAL EFFECT DIFFERENCE POTENTIAL TAX EFFECT 2005-06 (-)48,96,608/- (-)1,69,20,076/- 20,23,468/- 6,07,040 THEREFORE, IT IS APPARENT THAT ITAT HAS DISMISSED T HE APPEALS IN LINE ON THE BASIS OF WRONG FIGURE OF TAX EFFECT WHICH IS BE LOW RS.3 LAKH. BUT ACTUALLY THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE THAN RS.3 LAKHS. WHEN BENCH RAISED A QUERY FROM THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IN ITA NO.48- 49/KOL/2011, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS MENTIONED THE TAX EFFECT WHICH READS AS UNDER:- MACMET INDIA LIMITED A.YR. 2004-05 I.T. A PPEAL NO.48/KOL/2011 INCOME DECLARED INCOME ASSESSED DIFFERENTIAL TAX EF FECT (-) RS.1,49,52,413/- (-) RS.1,45,08,844/- RS.4,43,5 69/- RS.1,59,130/- MACME T INDIA LIMITED A.YR. 2005-06 I.T. A PPEAL NO.49/KOL/2011 INCOME DECLARED INCOME ASSESSED DIFFERENTIAL TAX EF FECT (-) RS.49,97,535/- (-) RS.48,96,608/- RS.1,00,927/- RS.36,932/- 4. ON QUERY FROM THE BENCH, WHETHER REV ENUE HAS CONTESTED THIS FACT AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. SR- DR COULD NOT ANSWER. SINCE THE ISSUE WAS NOT CONTESTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THA T THE TAX EFFECT IS MORE OR LESS AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL AND PRES ENTLY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE CONTESTED THIS FACT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MI STAKE CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTED IN MA NO.28/KOL/2013 (A/O ITA NO.49/KOL/2011) DCIT CIR-2, KOL V. M/S. MACMET INDIA LTD. PAGE 3 THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL AND THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN TH E ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. WE DISMISS THIS MA OF THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, MA OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 17 /01/2013 SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P GORGE) ( MAHAVIR SINGH) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP #- 17/01/2014 . . . . / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. 2 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 2- / CIT (A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 9 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ / ,