Coromandel Engineering Co. Ltd., CHENNAI V. DIT, CHENNAI

ITA 286/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61266 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M KARUNAKARAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT ME MBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P.NO.66/MDS/2012 (IN ITA NO.286/MDS/2012) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) & ITA NO.286/MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) M/S. COROMANDEL ENGINEERING CO.LTD., PARRY HOUSE, 3 RD FLOOR, 43, MOORE STREET, CHENNAI-600 001. PAN:AAACT7989E VS. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(I & CI), CHENNAI-34. (APPELLANT/PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MR. M.KARUNAKARAN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MR. YOGE SH KAMATH, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 13 TH JULY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 TH JULY, 2012 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IMPUGNIN G THE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (I & CI), C HENNAI PASSED UNDER SECTION 271FA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961. THE APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 3.5.2012. SINC E NONE HAD PUT APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE/APPELL ANT, THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUT ION. NOW M.P.NO.66/MDS/2012 & ITA NO.286/MDS/2012 2 THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR R ECALLING THE ORDER DATED 3.5.2012. ALONG WITH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI P.L.VEN KATACHALAM, DEPUTY MANAGER(ACCOUNTS) OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ST ATING REASONS FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON 3.5.2012. WE ARE SATI SFIED THAT NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE FIX ED WAS UNINTENTIONAL. THEREFORE, THE ORDER DATED 3.5.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED AND THE APPEAL IS HEARD AND DI SPOSED OF ON MERITS. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAD IMPUGNED THE ORDER OF THE DIREC TOR OF INCOME TAX(I &CI), CHENNAI DATED 8.12.2011 IMPOSING PENALTY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271FA OF TH E ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-FILING OF ANNUAL INFORMATION RETURN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 285BA(1) OF THE ACT FOR THE F INANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD. THE ASSESSEE HAS DIRECTLY COME TO THE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL ASSAILING T HE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (I&CI). 3. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT FIRST APP EAL AGAINST THE PENALTY ORDER UNDER SECTION 271FA IS NOT MAINTA INABLE M.P.NO.66/MDS/2012 & ITA NO.286/MDS/2012 3 BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 246A POWERS HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE CIT(A) TO ENTERTAIN A PPEALS AGAINST ANY ORDER IMPOSING PENALTY UNDER CHAPTER XX I OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 246A(1)(Q) IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW:- 246A. (1) ANY ASSESSEE [OR ANY DEDUCTOR] AGGRIEVED BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS (WHETHER MADE BEFORE OR AFTER THE APPOINTED DAY) MAY APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AGAINST (Q) AN ORDER IMPOSING A PENALTY UNDER CHAPTER XXI IN VIEW OF THE UNAMBIGUOUS PROVISIONS OF SECTION 24 6A(1)(Q) OF THE ACT, FIRST APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U NDER CHAPTER XXI CAN BE PREFERRED TO THE CIT(A). THE FIR ST APPEAL IMPUGNING ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271FA IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THE TR IBUNAL CANNOT ENTERTAIN THE PRESENT APPEAL. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IF AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A) IN AN APPEAL, HAS REMEDY TO FILE SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF PENALTY IM POSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271FA OF THE ACT. O UR VIEW IS M.P.NO.66/MDS/2012 & ITA NO.286/MDS/2012 4 FORTIFIED BY THE DECISION OF THE AMRITSAR BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SUB-REGISTRAR, NAKODAR VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX REPORTED AS 57 DTR 497. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE PRESENT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. 4. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERT Y TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME T AX (I & CI) BEFORE CIT(A), IF SO ADVISED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS AL LOWED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT MAIN TAINABLE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON FRIDAY, THE 13 TH DAY OF JULY, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P.GEORGE) (VIKAS AWASTHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 13 TH JULY, 2012. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R. (3) CIT (6) G.F.