IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH D, CHENNAI B E F O R E DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. I.T.A. NO.1833(MDS)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SUB-REGISTRAR, THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME- NEAR COURT, TRICHY RD., VS. TAX(CIB), KULITHALAI-639104 CHENNAI. TAN CHES24434F. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND I.T.A. NO.1785(MDS)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SUB-REGISTRAR, THE DIRECTOR OF INCO ME- NO.4/138, PWD REVENUE VS. TAX(CIB), MAIN STREET, CHENNAI. PUDUKOTTAI-628103. TAN MRISO3729F. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANTS BY : SHRI S.SRIDHAR RESPONDENT BY : SH RI K.E.B.RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL ITA NOS.1833 &1785(MDS)/2010 2 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE TWO ASSESSEES RELA TE TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THESE APPEALS ARE DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX(CIB), CHEN NAI, BOTH DATED 23-9-2010 IMPOSING PENALTIES UNDER SECTION 271FA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEES ARE SUB-REGISTRARS IN THE SERVICE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU. PENALTIES OF ` 38,600/- AND ` 38,700/- RESPECTIVELY IN THE CASES OF THESE ASSESSEES WERE L EVIED FOR THE DEFAULT OF NON FILING OF ANNUAL INFORMATION RETURNS . 2. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND CONSIDERED THE ISSUE. IT IS TO BE SEEN THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION AVAILABLE IN THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961, WHICH ENABLES THE ASSESSEES TO FILE DIRECT APPEALS BEFORE THE INCOME- TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A PENALTY O RDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271FA, BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX(CIB). THEREFORE, THESE APPEALS ARE LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED IN LIMINE. ITA NOS.1833 &1785(MDS)/2010 3 3. BUT WE APPRECIATE THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEES THAT SECTION 271FA OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FALLS UNDER CHAPTER XXI OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, WHEREBY A PENALTY ORDER IS APPEALABLE BEFORE THE CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) UNDER SECTION 246A(1)(Q) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. WHEN ENQUIRED, THE LEARNED COUNSEL EXPLAINED THAT APPEALS WERE FILED DIRECTLY BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, AS THE DEM AND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX(CIB) HAS SUGGESTED TH AT APPEALS LIE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE FIND THAT IT MAY BE O PEN FOR THE ASSESSEES TO FILE APPEALS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER O F INCOME- TAX(APPEALS), SUBJECT TO THE LEGAL OPINION THAT THE Y MAY OBTAIN. AS THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX( CIB) MENTIONED THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AS THE TRIBUNAL, THERE SEEM S TO BE A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSEES FOR NOT FILING A PPEALS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS). THEREFORE WE HOPE THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) WILL CONSIDER T HE QUESTION OF LIMITATION SYMPATHETICALLY. ITA NOS.1833 &1785(MDS)/2010 4 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS THESE TWO APPEALS A RE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON TUESDAY, THE 7 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH JUNE, 2011. V.A.P. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F.