Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This is an appeal by assessee against the penalty of Rs. 55,700/- levied u/s. 271FA of the Income Tax Act [Act] by the DIT(I&CI), Hyderabad dt. 10-03-2017. Assessee preferred to file the appeal before this forum in Form 36 enclosing the notice of demand issued by the said DIT dt. 10-03-2017, wherein in Column No. 6, it is specifically noted that assessee may present the appeal to the CIT(A) within thirty days of the receipt of the said notice.

2. Since the provisions of Section 253 of the Act does not specify the order of penalty u/s. 271FA as an appealable order before the ITAT, the assessee was asked to show cause why the appeal should I.T.A. No. 687/Hyd/2017 :- 2 -:

(3) However, taking notice of the fact that penalty under Sec. 271FA was also referred to in Sec. 273B of the Act, it is felt by the assessee-appellant that such levy is not MANADOTRY as in the case of levy of Int. under Sec.

234-A & 234B etc., and that such levy is only DISCREATIONARY and hence there lies an appeal against the order under Sec. 271FA as per the provisions of Law.

(4) That as per the provisions contained in clause "6" appended to Sub Sec. 1 of Sec. 253 of the Act, an order passed by the Principal CIT/CIT under Sec. 271 of the Act is also construed to be an order which could be appealed against before the Hon'ble ITAT.

9.3 Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in its latest order in Civil Appeal No. 10245/2017, dt 08-082017 to the effect that the assessee is not a Cooperative Bank Vide para 24 there of. However, the Hon'ble S.C. denied such claim under Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on some other grounds holding to the effect that the assessee is also rendering services to NOMINAL MEMBERS and a M.A. against such finding is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

9.4 However, the fact remains in the instant case is that the assessee's Status cannot be regarded as a COOP. Bank as per the decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT in assessee's same case for the A.Y. 2012-13 and even as per the latest order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for the A.Y. 2009-10 as envisaged above. Thus the provisions contained in Sec. 285BA read with Rule 114E of the Act are not applicable to the assessee's case and thus the LEVY UNDER SEC. 271FA may be VOID ABINITIO. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned PENALTY UNDER SEC. 271FA may be ordered to be SET ASIDE treating the same as NON EST. IN LAW".

and the right of appeal on every order has to be statutorily provided either to the CIT(A) or to the ITAT as the case may be. Since a penalty order u/s. 271FA is not directly appealable order before this forum, the appeal preferred by assessee is liable to be dismissed.

6. However, before concluding it is not out of place to state that the Paper Book furnished before this forum indicates that assessee did in fact file statement u/s. 285BA(1) before the Income Tax authorities so the penalty levied for not filing u/s 271FA does not arise. Vide a letter dt.27-10-2016, the ITO, HQrs., in the Office of DIT(I&CI) informed the assessee that in about 120 number of transactions, PAN was not mentioned. It was further informed that "it may be noted that furnishing of incomplete and incorrect information is liable for penalty u/s. 271FAA of the Act". Assessee was asked to update the data by quoting PAN by 04-11-2016. However, the DIT(I&CI) issued a show cause notice dt. 31-10-2016 (i.e., within the time given to assessee for rectifying the return) as to why a penalty u/s. 271FA should not be levied. As placed on record, an explanation was indeed filed by assessee on 06-12- 2016, asking for a fortnight time and further another letter was filed on 28-12-2016 explaining the factual and legal position with reference to levy of penalty u/s. 271FA. There is no mention of these replies given by assessee in the penalty order passed by the DIT. Not only that the penalty order refers to a show cause letter dt. 29-01-2016, whereas show cause issued by the ITO, HQrs., is dt. 27-10-2016. The first sentence of the penalty order indicates that 'assessee is a person covered as a Registrar or Sub-Registrar appointed u/s. 6 of the Registration Act, 1908'. However, as seen I.T.A. No. 687/Hyd/2017 :- 6 -: