Tehsildar, CHITTORGARH V. CIT(CIB), JAIPUR

ITA 19/JODH/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 62066 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R KOKANI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.19/JU/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 TEHSILDAR, AROUND, VS. THE CIT (CIB), PRATAPGARH JAIPUR (RAJASTHAN) PAN NO. JDHT01069F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.R. KOKANI DATE OF HEARING : 18-07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18-07-2012 ORDER PER N.K.SAINI, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 19.08.2009 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CIB), JAIPUR. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L:- 1. THAT THE LD CIT HAS GROSSLY ERRED BY NOT ACCEPTING THE REAL FACTS AND IMPOSED HUGE PENALTY U/S 271FA WHICH IS NOT PROPER AND AGAINST THE NATURAL LAW OF JUSTICE. 2 2. THAT LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE APPELLANT NEEDS JUSTICE AND SUBMITS THE APPEAL FOR WANT OF RELIEF & JUSTICE, WHICH MAY BE ALLOWED ON T HE BASIS OF FACTS ON RECORD. 3. THAT ASSESSEE RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADD, DELETE AND AMEND ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS DURING THE COUR SE OF HEARING OF THE CASE. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, WE THEREFORE, PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEA L EX. PARTE ON MERIT AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. 4. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE DIT (CIB), JAIPUR ISSUED A NOTICE TO THE SUB-REGISTRAR (TEHSILDAR) REQUIRING H IM TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271FA OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED UPON HIM FOR FAILURE TO FILE THE ANNUAL INTIMATION RETURN (AIR) WITHIN THE PRESC RIBED TIME. IN RESPONSE THERETO, THE TEHSILDAR I.E. THE ASSESSEE V IDE LETTER DATED 15.3.2009 STATED ABOUT THE TDS QUARTERLY REPORT WHI CH WAS NOT RELATED TO AIR. THE DIT (CIB) OBSERVED THAT NEITHER THE AIR N OR ANY FURTHER REPLY HAD BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE SUB-REGISTRAR I.E. THE A SSESSEE. THEREFORE, PROCEEDINGS U/S 271 FA, OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED A ND PENALTY OF RS. 35,300/- U/S 271FA OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED. NOW THE A SSESSEE HAS FILED DIRECT APPEAL. 3 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR, WHO MAINLY SUPPORTED T HE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS NOTICED THAT A SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEE N ADJUDICATED UPON BY THE ITAT, JODHPUR BENCH IN THE CASE OF SUB-REGISTRAR, S RI DUNGARGARH VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CIB), JAIPUR IN ITA NO. 560 /JU/2009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WHEREIN VIDE ORDER DATED 3. 5.2010, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NO DIRECT APPEAL LIES BEFORE THE ITAT IN RESPECT OF ORDER PASSED U/S 271FA OF THE ACT AND THE RELEVANT FINDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN PARA 3 OF THE AFORESAID ORDER, WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 3. IN CATENA OF CASES, THIS TRIBUNAL HAD ENTERTAIN ED A VIEW THAT NO DIRECT APPEAL LIES BEFORE THE APPELL ATE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 271FA OF THE ACT. FOR THIS REASON, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 3.5.2010. 6. SO, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID REFERRE D TO ORDER DATED 3.5.2010 OF THE ITAT JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR IN THE CASE OF SUB- REGISTRAR, SRI DUNGARGARH VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TA X (CIB), JAIPUR IN ITA NO. 560/JU/2009, THIS DIRECT APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE FILED IN THE ITAT IS DISMISSED CONSIDERING THE SAME AS NOT MAINTAINAB LE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18.07.2 012) SD/- SD/- (R.K.GUPTA) (N.K.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMER DATED : 18TH JULY, 2012 RKK 4 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR