The Sub Registrar, Madurai V. DIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2113/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 211321714 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR I VIJAYAKUMAR

Judgement Text

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, NO.1, MELUR MAIN ROAD, TAMARAIPATTI, CHITTAMPATTI, MADURAI 625 122. TAN MRISO 05209 B (APPELLANT) V. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CIB), CHENNAI 600 034. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : DR. I. V IJAYAKUMAR, 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 TH E ACT) WAS LEVIED ON IT. I.T.A. NO. 2113/MDS/10 2 2. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED UP FOR HEARING, NOBOD Y APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. 3. LEARNED D.R., SUPPORTING THE ORDER OF THE DIRECT OR OF INCOME TAX (CIB), CHENNAI, LEVYING PENALTY UNDER SECTION 2 71FA OF THE ACT, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO PROVISION UNDER THE INC OME-TAX ACT, 1961 ENABLING AN ASSESSEE TO FILE AN APPEAL DIRECTLY BEF ORE 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 T RIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SUB-REGISTRAR V. DIT (CIB) IN I.T.A. NO. 1875/MD S/2010 DATED 13 TH JANUARY, 2011. 4. WE HAVE HEARD CONTENTION OF LEARNED D.R. AND ALS O PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE DIT(CIB). WE FIND THAT WHEN SIMIL AR ISSUE WAS RAISED BY ONE ANOTHER SUB-REGISTRAR, THIS TRIBUNAL, VIDE I TS ORDER DATED 13 TH JANUARY, 2011 IN I.T.A. NO. 1875/MDS/2010, HELD AS UNDER :- 3. BUT WE APPRECIATE THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUN SEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT SECTION 271FA OF TH E 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 ENQU IRED, THE LD. I.T.A. NO. 2113/MDS/10 3 COUNSEL EXPLAINED THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED DIRECTL Y 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 TH E 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 DIS MISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. 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 30 TH AUGUST, 2011. KRI. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENTDIT [CIB], CHENNAI-34/ D.R./GUARD FILE