Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
The Sub Registrar, Madurai vs Assessee on 30 August, 2011
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'C' BENCH, CHENNAI
BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 2113/Mds/2010
(Assessment Year : 2009-10)
The Sub-Registrar,
Registration Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu, v. The Director of Income Tax (CIB),
No.1, Melur Main Road, Chennai - 600 034.
Tamaraipatti, Chittampatti,
Madurai - 625 122.
TAN - MRISO 05209 B
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : None
Respondent by : Dr. I. Vijayakumar, CIT-DR
Date of Hearing : 30.08.2011
Date of Pronouncement : 30.08.2011
O R D E R
PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
In this appeal, grievance of the assessee is that penalty under Section 271FA of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") was levied on it.
2 I.T.A. No. 2113/Mds/10
2. When the appeal was called up for hearing, nobody appeared on behalf of assessee.
3. Learned D.R., supporting the order of the Director of Income Tax (CIB), Chennai, levying penalty under Section 271FA of the Act, submitted that there was no provision under the Income-tax Act, 1961 enabling an assessee to file an appeal directly before this Tribunal, on a levy of penalty under Section 271FA of the Act. Reliance was placed on a decision of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Sub-Registrar v. DIT (CIB) in I.T.A. No. 1875/Mds/2010 dated 13th January, 2011.
4. We have heard contention of learned D.R. and also perused the order of the DIT(CIB). We find that when similar issue was raised by one another Sub-Registrar, this Tribunal, vide its order dated 13th January, 2011 in I.T.A. No. 1875/Mds/2010, held as under :-
"3. But we appreciate the contention of the ld. counsel appearing for the assessee that section 271FA of the I.T. Act, 1961 falls under Chapter XXI of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the penalty order is applicable before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) u/s 246A(1)(q) of the Act. When enquired, the ld.3 I.T.A. No. 2113/Mds/10
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."
5. In view of the above order of this Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the appeal filed by the assessee has to be dismissed.
6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on the Thirtieth Day of August, 2011.
sd/- sd/-
(Hari Om Maratha) (Abraham P. George)
Judicial Member Accountant Member
Chennai,
Dated the 30th August, 2011.
Kri.
Copy to: Appellant/RespondentDIT [CIB], Chennai-34/
D.R./Guard file