Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
The Sub-Registrar, Vriddhachalam vs Assessee on 13 January, 2011
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI.
Before Shri U.B.S. Bedi, J. M. & Shri Abraham P. George, A. M.
I.T.A. No. 2009/Mds/2010
Assessment Year: 2009-10
The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar's Vs. The Director of Income Tax (CIB),
Office, 48, Salem Main Rd, Mettur (I/C), Chennai
Dam, Salem Dist.
[TAN : CHES24528A]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : None
Revenue by : Shri P.B. Sekaran
I.T.A. No. 2013/Mds/2010
Assessment Year:2008-09
The Sub-Registrar, Vs. The Director of Income Tax,, CIB,
Koothanallur. Chennai.
[TAN : CHES09133F]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri S. Sridhar
Revenue by : Shri P.B. Sekaran
I.T.A. No. 2015/Mds/2010
Assessment Year: 2009-10
The Sub-Registrar, West Main Road, Vs. The Director of Income Tax (CIB),
Pennadam, Virudhachalam 606 105. Chennai
[TAN : CHES27673C]
I.T.A. No. 2016/Mds/2010
Assessment Year: 2009-10
The Sub-Registrar, TVA Colony, Vs. The Director of Income Tax (CIB),
Veppur 606 304. Chennai
[TAN : CHET11007D]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri G. Baskar
Revenue by : Shri P.B. Sekaran
ORDER
PER U.B.S. Bedi, J.M.
All these four assessees have filed appeals against the order of levying penalty under section 271FA of the Income Tax Act passed by the Director of Income Tax (CIB), Chennai for different assessment years.
2 ITA Nos Nos. 2009, 2013, 2015 & 2016/Mds/10
2. At the very outset, the ld. DR submitted that since the assessees have directly filed first appeal before the Tribunal against penalty orders passed by the Director of Income Tax, CIB, Chennai under section 271FA, whereas the section 253 does not provide for appeal against the order passed under section 271FA. Therefore, these appeals are not maintainable and should be dismissed in limine. In support of his contention, the ld. DR filed copy of the order of ITAT Chennai 'D' Bench in the case of Sub-Registrar vs. DIT(CIB) in ITA No. 1875/Mds/2010 dated 13.01.2011. The representative of one of the assessees namely Sub-Registrar, Melapalayam v. DIT(CIB) has enclosed another copy of the order in ITA No. 2006/Mds/2010 dated 12.04.2011, in which order referred to by the ld. DR has been referred to and pleaded to decide the appeal on the basis of the ITAT order. Whereas, other representatives of the assessees simply stated that since in the demand notice issued in their cases, the first appellate authority has been mentioned to be ITAT. Therefore, they have filed appeal directly before the Tribunal and since there is already orders of Tribunal passed in this regard, therefore the same should be followed.
3. We, after having heard both the sides, and considering the material on record, find that in the case of Sub-Registrar vs. DIT(CIB) in ITA No. 1875/Mds/2010 dated 13.01.2011 following order has been passed:
"This is an appeal filed by the assessee. Appeal is directed against the penalty order passed by the Director of Income-tax [CIB] at Chennai u/s 271FA of the I.T. Act, 1961.
2. We heard both the sides and considered the material. It is to be seen that there is no provision available in the I.T. Act, 1961 enabling the assessee to file direct appeal before the income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the matter of a penalty order passed u/s 271FA by the Director of Income-tax [Exemptions]. Therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed in limine.
3 ITA Nos Nos. 2009, 2013, 2015 & 2016/Mds/10
3. But we appreciate the contention of the ld. counsel appearing for the assessee that section 271FA of the I.T. Act, 1961falls under Chapter XXI of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the penalty order is appealable before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) u/s 246A(1)(q) of the Act. When enquired, the ld. counsel explained that the appeal was filed directly before the Tribunal as the demand notice issued by the Director of Income-tax [CIB] has suggested that the appeal lies before the Tribunal.
4. In the circumstances, we find that it may be open for the assessee to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), subject to the legal opinion that he may obtain.
5. But this appeal which is filed directly before the Tribunal is liable to be dismissed.
6. In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed."
4. Further the said order has been followed in another case, which has been relied upon by the ld. AR of he assessee in ITA No. 2009/Mds/2010 with the prayer to decide the appeal on the basis of ITAT order. Considering the decision already taken by two Benches of the Tribunal at Chennai, we follow the said order and dismiss all the appeals of the assessee in limine being not maintainable.
14. As a result, all the appeals of different assessees are dismissed.
Order pronounced soon after the conclusion of hearing on 02.06.2011.
Sd/- Sd/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (U.B.S. BEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Vm/- Dated : 02.06.2011. Copy To: The assessee//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.