P.T.Lee Chengalvaraya Naicker Trust, CHENNAI V. DIT, CHENNAI

ITA 312/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61256 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S MOHARANA
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Section: 80G; 12AA; 147; 263; 132; 12; 10; 154; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS. 312 & 313/MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2009-2010) M/S P.T. LEE CHENGALVARAYA NAICKER TRUST, NO.2 & 3, E.V.K. SAMPATH SALAI, VEPERY, CHENNAI - 600 007. PAN : AAAAP0093R (APPELLANT) V. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI - 600 034 . (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : DR. S. MOHARANA, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.06.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.06.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN BOTH THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR IMPUGNE D ASSESSMENT YEAR, IT ASSAILS ORDERS OF DIT(E) PASSED UNDER SECT ION 119(2)(B) OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 I.T.A. NOS. 312 & 313/MDS/12 2. LEARNED D.R. AT THE OUTSET POINTED OUT THAT ORDE R OF DIT(E) UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE ACT WAS NOT APPEALABLE BEF ORE THIS TRIBUNAL. LEARNED A.R. FAIRLY AGREED TO THIS. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS PER SECTION 253(1) OF THE ACT, THE ORDERS AGAINST W HICH APPEAL CAN BE FILED TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ARE AS UNDER:- APPEALS TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. 6 253. (1) ANY ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS MAY APPEAL TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGAINST SUCH ORDER ( A ) AN ORDER PASSED BY A 7 [DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] 8 [BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998] 9 [OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] UNDER 10 [***] 11 [ SECTION 154 ], 12 [***] SECTION 250 , 13 [ SECTION 271 , SECTION 271A OR SECTION 272A ]; OR 14 [( B ) AN ORDER PASSED BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER CLA USE ( C ) OF SECTION 158BC , IN RESPECT OF SEARCH INITIATED UNDER SECTION 132 OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ANY ASSETS REQUISITI ONED UNDER SECTION 132A , AFTER THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 1995, BUT BEFORE THE 1ST D AY OF JANUARY, 1997; OR] 15 [( BA ) AN ORDER PASSED BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SUB -SECTION (1) OF SECTION 115VZC ; OR] ( C ) AN ORDER PASSED BY A COMMISSIONER 16 [UNDER SECTION 12AA 17 [OR UNDER CLAUSE ( VI ) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G ] OR] UNDER SECTION 263 18 [OR UNDER SECTION 271 ] 19 [OR UNDER SECTION 272A ] 20 [***] OR AN ORDER PASSED BY HIM UNDER SECTION 154 AMENDING HIS ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 ] 21 [OR AN ORDER PASSED BY A CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR A DIRECTOR GENERAL OR A DIRECTOR UNDER SECTION 272A ; 22 [OR]] 22 [( D ) AN ORDER PASSED BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SUB -SECTION (3), OF SECTION 143 OR SECTION 147 IN PURSUANCE OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL OR AN ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 IN RESPECT OF SUCH ORDER.] 3 I.T.A. NOS. 312 & 313/MDS/12 ORDER UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE ACT OF DIT(E) DOES NOT APPEAR UNDER ANY OF THE ABOVE. THEREFORE, WE AGREE WITH T HE LEARNED D.R. THAT SUCH AN ORDER IS NOT APPEALABLE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNA L. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE STAND DISMISSED. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON WEDNESDAY, THE 27 TH OF JUNE, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 27 TH JUNE, 2012. KRI. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) DIT(E), CHENNAI (4) D.R. (5) GUARD FILE