The Sub Registrar, Nakodar V. The Director of Income tax (CIB), Chandigarh

ITA 406/ASR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5804 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: J S BHASIN
• Keywords: Application of stay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 80G; 12AA; 250; 147; 246; 263; 132; 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.L. KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.404 TO 407(ASR)/2010 FINANCIAL YEARS:2005-06 TO 2008-09 PAN :JLDT00005F SUB-REGISTRAR, VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (CIB), TEHSIL OFFICE, NAKOAR. CHANDIGARH. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. J.S. BHASIN, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SH. TARSEM LAL ORDER PER H.L. KARWA, VP THESE FOUR APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (CIB), CHANDIGARH), DATED 27.07.2010, RELATING TO FINANCIAL YEARS, 2005-06, 2 006-07, 2007-08 & 2008- 09. 2. IN THESE APPEALS, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED TH E IMPOSITION OF PENALTY OF RS.12,800/-, RS.18,200/-, RS.30,300/-, AND RS.11 ,400/- FOR DELAYED FILING OF AIR FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07, 20 07-08 & 2008-09. THE ISSUE IS COMMON AND, THEREFORE, WE WILL DECIDE THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS NOTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME- TAX (CIB), CHANDIGARH, ARE AS UNDER: 2 ORDER U/S 271FA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 THE SUB-REGISTRAR, TEHSIL OFFICE, NAKODAR (PUNJAB) , (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE FILER), WAS REQUI RED TO FILE ANNUAL INFORMATION RETURN FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 AS UNDER: FINANCIAL YEAR DUE DATE FOR FILING OF AIR 2005-06 31.08.2006 2006-07 31.08.2007 2007-08 31.08.2008 2008-09 31.08.2009 2. SECTION 285BA(10 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HE REINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) REQUIRES CERTAIN SPECIFIED PERSONS (FILE RS) TO FILE AN ANNUAL INFORMATION RETURN (AIR) IN RESPECT OF SPECIFIED FINANCIAL TRAN SACTIONS REGISTERD OR RECORDED BY HIM DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR. THE NATURE OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE THRESHOLD VALUE FOR INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED IN THE AIR AR E PRESCRIBED IN THE TABLE (ITEM NO.6) IN RULE 116E OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. T HE FORM IN WHICH THE RETURN IS REQUIRED TO BE FILED IS FORM NO. 61A. THE CENTRA L BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NEW DELHI HAD AUTHORIZED M/S. NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOS ITORIES LTD. (NSDL) AS THE AGENCY AUTHORIZED TO RECEIVED AIRS ON THE BEHALF OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL INFORMATION BRANCH). THE FILER CAN ALS O FURNISH THE AIR WITH THE FACILITATION CENTRES OF NSDL, LOCATED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. 3. ITEM NO. 6 OF THE TABLE IN RULE 114E SPECIFIES THAT THE REGISTRAR OR SUB- REGISTRAR APPOINTED U/S 6 OF THE REGISTRATION ACT, 19808 IS REQUIRED TO FILE AIR IN RESPECT OF TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE OR SALE BY ANY PERSON OR IMMOVABLE PROPERTY VALUED AT THIRTY LAKH RUPEES OR MORE. THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE AIR IS THE 31 ST AUGUST IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE TRANSACTION IS REGISTERED OR RECORDED. IN THE EVEN OF FAILURE TO F URNISH THE AIR, PENALTY IS LEVIABLE U/S 271FA WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: IF A PERSON WHO IS REQUIRED TO FURNISH AN ANNUAL IN FORMATION RETURN, AS REQUIRED UNDER SUB-SECTION(10 OF SECTION 285BA, FA ILS TO FURNISH SUCH RETURN WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER THAT SUB-SECTION, THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY PRESCRIBED UNDER THAT SUB-SECTION MAY DIRECT THAT S UCH PERSON SHALL PAY, BY WAY OF PENALTY, A SUM OF ONE HUNDRED RUPEES FOR EVERY D AY DURING WHICH THE FAILURE CONTINUES. 4, AS PER THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE, THE SUB-REGIS TRAR, TEHSIL OFFICE, NAKODAR, (PUNJAB), THE FILER, FILED THE ANNUAL INFO RMATION RETURN (AIRS) LATE, IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE AND SALE BY ANY PERSONS OF IMMO VABLE PROPERTY VALUED AT THIRTY LAKH RUPEES OR MORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 AS PER THE DETAILS GIVEN BELOW: 3 S.NO. FINANCIAL YEAR DUE DATE FOR FILING AIR FILED ON DELAY 1. 2005-06 31.08.2006 06.01.2007 128 DAYS 2. 2006-07 31.08.2007 01.03.2008 182 DAYS 3. 2007-08 31.08.2008 30.06.2009 303 DAYS 4. 2008-09 31.08.2009 23.12,2009 114 DAYS 5. IN THIS REGARD SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR THE FINANCI AL YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 WAS ISSUED BY THIS OFFICE ON 28.0 1.2010 ASKING THE SUB- REGISTRAR TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY PENALTY U/S 271FA OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED UPON IT FOR FAILURE TO FURNISH THE AIRS IN TIME, AND THE REPLY WAS SOUGHT BY 17.02.2010. IN RESPONSE TO THIS SHOW CAUSE NEITH ER ANYBODY ATTENDED NOR ANY REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT ETC. WAS RECEIVED IN THIS O FFICE. HOWEVER, THE FILER WAS ALLOWED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO FILE ITS WRITTEN REP LY VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER NO. DIT/CIB/CHD/2009-10/4834 DATED 23.02.2010 AND THE C ASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 03.03.2010. AGAIN THIS FINAL OPPORTUNITY LETTER REMAINED UN-ATTENDED. SECOND SHOW CAUSE WAS ISSUED TO THE FILER VIDE THIS OFFIC E LETTER NO. DIT/CIB/CHD/2010-11/992 DATED 26.06.2010 FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 08.07.2010. AGAIN ON 08.07.2010 NEITHER ANYBODY ATT ENDED NOR ANY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION WAS RECEIVED IN THIS OFFICE. 5.1. STILL FURTHER FINAL OPPORTUNITY WAS ALLOWED TO THE FILER FOR FILING ITS REPLY VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER NO.DIT/CIB/CHD/2010-11/1105 DATED 09.07.2010 AND THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 16.07.2010. THIS FINAL OPPORTUNI TY TOO REMAINED UNATTENDED. STILL FURTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS ALLOWED TO THE FILER FOR FURNISHING ITS REPLY SHOWING REASONABLE CAUSE THAT CONSTRAINED IT TO FILE THE AI RS LATE. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR 26.07.2010. ON THE APPOINTED DATE NONE ATTENDED. HO WEVER, ON 27.07.2010 SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH, TEHSILDAR-CUM-SUB-REGISTRAR, NAKOD AR, DISTT. JALANDHAR, ATTENDED AND FILED LETTER DATED 27.07.2010 AND SUBM ITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF HIS REPLY FILED TODAY. HE F URTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF HIS REPLY FILED TO DAY. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT HE IS NOT AWARE ABOUT THE REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF AIR FOR EARLIER YEARS AND HE HAS BEEN IN THIS PRESENT ASSIGNMENT ONLY SINCE SEP TEMBER, 2009 AND WOULD TRY TO FILE THE FURTHER AIRS IN TIME. THE WRITTEN REPLY/ LETTER DATED 27.07.2010 FILED BY THE FILER IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: IT IS SUBMITTED AHT I AM WORKING AS TEHSILDAR AT N AKODAR FOR THE LAST QUARTER OF 2009 TO TILL DATE. IN MY TIME THE STATEM ENTS WHATEVER CAN BE DONE, I TRIED BEST TO DEPOSIT IN EARLIER. BUT THERE IS VERY SHORTAGE OF STAFF AND SHORTAGE OF COMPUTER LEARNING STAFF ALSO AND I HAVE TO PERFORM VERY MULTI-DIMENSIONAL DUTIEIS ALSO. SO MY DUTY IS VERY HARD. AS FOR FEW MONTHS, I AM ALREADY MUCH BUSY IN ELECTION REGISTRATION ROLE WORK AND CENSUS WORK ALS O. SO IT MAY BE SOME TIME LATE DUE TO VERY UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES NOT INTENTION ALLY. SO IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED TO YOUR GOODSELF TO PLEA SE CONSIDER MY COMPULSIONS AND I HEREBY TENDER MY UN-CONDITIONAL A POLOGY FOR THIS. 4 6. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE FILER AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORD. THE EXPLANATIONS OFFERED BY THE FI LER IN ITS REPLY QUOTED ABOVE ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE IN VIEW OF THE FOLLOWING: I) THE FILER HAS, IN HIS LETTER ONLY MENTIONED ABOUT T HE FACT OF HIS JOINING IN SEPTEMBER, 2009, SHORTAGE OF STAFF AND L ACK OF COMPUTER LITERATE PERSONS AVAILABLE IN OFFICE TO PERFORM THE REQUIRED DUTIES. II) THE FILER IS ONLY MENTIONING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS DUR ING THIS PERIOD I.E. SEPTEMBER, 2009 ONWARD, WHEREAS THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICES ISSUED ARE ABOUT THE DELAY IN FILING OF AIR FROM FI NANCIAL YEAR 2005-06 TO 2008-09. SO PRACTICALLY WHATEVER THE FIL ER WAS MENTIONED IN ITS LETTER IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE DELA Y IN EARLIER YEARS. IN OTHER WORDS, IT APPEARS THAT THE FILER HAS NO EX PLANATION TO OFFER FOR THE DELAY IN FILING OF AIRS FOR THESE YEARS. T HEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION, LEAVE ALONE REASONABLE CAUSE, THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE FILER ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE AS THES E ARE NOT FOUND RELEVANT TO THE DELAY IN FILING OF AIRS AT THE RELE VANT POINT OF TIME. III) FURTHER, IT APPEARS THAT THE FILER IS ONLY CONCERNE D ABOUT CLEARING HIS OWN NAME AND DOES NOT SEEM TO BE CONCERNED AT A LL ABOUT THE DELAY IN FILING OF AIR DURING EARLIER YEARS I.E. D URING THE TENURE OF ITS PREDECESSORS. THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE NOT I N RESPECT OF THE PERSONS SPECIFIC, THESE ARE IN RESPECT OF THE OFFIC E WHICH THE INCUMBENT HAS OCCUPIED AT PRESENT. IN ANY CASE WHAT EVER THE FILER STATED IN HIS SUBMISSIONS IS NOT RELEVANT AND HENCE NOT ACCEPTABLE. 7. FURTHER, IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE FILE R I.E. THE SUB-REGISTRAR, NAKODAR, HAS BEEN FILING AIRS LATE FOR THE LAST FIV E YEARS I.E. RIGHT FROM FINANCIAL YEAR 2005-06 TO 2008-09. HENCE, THESE FACTS MAKE TH E FILER A HABITUAL DEFAULTER WITHOUT ANY CONCERN/RESPECT FOR THE LAW OF THE LAND . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT BECOMES IMPERATIVE THAT SUITABLE PENALTY AS PER LAW IS LEVIED ON THE FILER. 8. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE SUB-RE GISTRAR, NAKODAR (THE FILER) IS HELD LIABLE FOR PENALTY U/S 271FA OF THE ACT, 1961 @ RS.100/- PER DAY FOR DEFAULT, WHICH IS CALCULATED FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR S UNDER CONSIDERATION AS UNDER: FINANCIAL YEAR PERIOD OF DEFAULT NO. OF DAYS OF DEFAULT AMOUNT OF PENALTY 2005-06 1.9.2006 TO 6.1.2007 128 DAYS RS.12,800/- 2006-07 1.9.2007 TO 1.3.2008 182 DAYS RS.18,200/- 2007-08 1.9.2008 TO 30.6.2009 303 DAYS RS.30,300/- 2008-09 1.9.2009TO23.12.2009 114 DAYS RS.11,400/- TOTAL 727 DAYS RS.72,700/- ACCORDINGLY, PENALTY OF RS.72,700/- (727X1000 IS IM POSED. 5 4. AT THE VERY OUTSET, SH. TARSEM LAL, THE LD. DR, VEH EMENTLY ARGUED THAT THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO HIM, THE APPEALS SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE THE CONCERNED LD. CIT(A), AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 246A(1)(Q) OF THE ACT, AND NOT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HE ALSO INVITED O UR ATTENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 253 OF THE ACT, WHEREIN NO JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN THE APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271 FA, HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE TRIBUNAL. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI J.S. BHASIN, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS THE JURIS DICTION TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEALS AND, THEREFORE, THE APPEALS MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL TO ENTERTAIN THESE APPEALS. IN OUR VIEW, T HIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS NO JURISDICTION TO DECIDE THE APPEALS PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME- TAX (CIB), CHANDIGARH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROVISIO NS UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE ACT, TO ENTERTAIN THE APPEALS BY THE TRIBUNAL. SECTION 253 OF THE ACT, READS AS UNDER: APPEALS TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. 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 [DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEAL S)] [BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998] [OR, AS THE CASE MY B E, A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] UNDER [***] [ SECTION 154 ], [***] SECTION 250 , [ SECTION 271 , SECTION 271A OR SECTION 272A ]; OR [( 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 REQ UISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A , AFTER THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 1995, BUT BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1997; OR] 6 [( BA ) AN ORDER PASSED BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) OF SECTION 115VZC ; OR] ( C ) AN ORDER PASSED BY A COMMISSIONER [UNDER SECTION 12AA [OR UNDER CLAUSE ( VI ) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G ] OR] UNDER SECTION 263 [OR UNDER SECTION 271 ] [OR UNDER SECTION 272A ] [***] OR AN ORDER PASSED BY HIM UNDER SECTION 154 AMENDING HIS ORDER UNDER SECTION 263 ] [OR AN ORDER PASSED BY A CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR A DIRECTOR GENERAL OR A DIRECTOR UNDER SECTION 272A ; [OR]] [( 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 OR DER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 IN RESPECT OF SUCH ORDER.] (2) THE COMMISSIONER MAY, IF HE OBJECTS TO ANY ORDE R PASSED BY A [DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] [BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998] 1 [OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, A COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] UNDER [ SECTION 154 OR] SECTION 250 , DIRECT THE [ASSESSING] OFFICER TO APPEAL TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER. (3) EVERY APPEAL UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OR SUB-SECT ION (2) SHALL BE FILED WITHIN SIXTY DAYS OF THE DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER SOUGHT TO BE APPEALED AGAINST IS COMMUNICATED TO THE ASSESSEE OR TO THE COMMISSIONER, AS THE CASE MAY BE : [ PROVIDED THAT IN RESPECT OF ANY APPEAL UNDER CLAUSE ( B ) OF SUB- SECTION (1), THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS SIXTY DAYS, THE WORDS THIRTY DAYS HAD BEEN SUBS TITUTED.] (4) THE [ASSESSING] OFFICER OR THE ASSESSEE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, ON RECEIPT OF NOTICE THAT AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE [DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] [OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, TH E COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] HAS BEEN PREFERRED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OR SUB-SECTION (2) BY THE OTHER PARTY, MAY, NOTWITHSTANDING THAT H E MAY NOT HAVE APPEALED AGAINST SUCH ORDER OR ANY PART THEREOF; WI THIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE, FILE A MEMORANDUM OF CRO SS-OBJECTIONS, VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER, AGAINST ANY PART OF THE ORDER 8 OF THE [DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)] [OR, AS THE CAS E MAY BE, THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)], AND SUCH MEMORANDUM SHALL BE DISPOSED OF BY THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AS IF IT WERE AN APPEA L PRESENTED WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3). (5) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MAY ADMIT AN APPEAL OR P ERMIT THE FILING OF A MEMORANDUM OF CROSS-OBJECTIONS AFTER THE EXPIRY O F THE RELEVANT 7 PERIOD REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (3) OR SUB-SECTIO N (4), IF IT IS SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT PRESENTING IT WITHIN THAT PERIOD. (6) AN APPEAL TO THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SHALL BE I N THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER AND SHALL, IN THE CASE OF AN APPEAL MADE, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS RELATING THERETO, BE ACCOMPANIED BY A FEE OF, ( A ) WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS COMPUTE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE CASE TO WHICH THE APPEAL RELATES, IS ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND RUPEES OR LESS, FIVE HUNDRED RUPEE S, ( B ) WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, COMPUTED AS AFORESAID, IN THE CASE TO WHICH THE APPEAL RELATES IS MORE THA N ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND RUPEES BUT NOT MORE THAN TWO HUNDRED THOUS AND RUPEES, ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED RUPEES, ( C ) WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, COMPUTED AS AFORESAID, IN THE CASE TO WHICH THE APPEAL RELATES IS MORE THA N TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND RUPEES, ONE PER CENT OF THE ASSESSED INCOM E, SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM OF TEN THOUSAND RUPEES, ( D ) WHERE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF AN APPEAL RELATES TO ANY MATTER, OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED IN CLAUSES ( A ), ( B ) AND ( C ), FIVE HUNDRED RUPEES:] PROVIDED THAT NO SUCH FEE SHALL BE PAYABLE IN THE CASE OF A N APPEAL REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (2) OR A MEMORANDUM OF C ROSS-OBJECTIONS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (4). (7) AN APPLICATION FOR STAY OF DEMAND SHALL BE AC COMPANIED BY A FEE OF FIVE HUNDRED RUPEES. 6.1 FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT NO POWER TO EN TERTAIN THE APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 271FA, HAS B EEN PROVIDED TO THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THE APPEALS CANNOT BE ENTERTAI NED BY THE TRIBUNAL. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE POWERS HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE CIT(A) UNDER SECTION 246A(1)(Q), WHICH READS AS UNDER: SEC. 246A(1)(Q) : AN ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS (WHETHER MADE BEFORE OR AFTER THE APPOINTED DAY) MAY APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AGAINST: 8 AN ORDER IMPOSING A PENALTY UNDER CHAPTER XXI 6.2. IN VIEW OF THE CLEAR PROVISIONS OF SECTION 246 A(1)(Q) OF THE ACT, AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER CHAPTER XXI C AN BE PREFERRED BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271FA FALLS U NDER THE CHAPTER XXI OF THE ACT. THUS, IN VIEW OF THE CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOU S PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, THESE APPEALS CANNOT BE ADMITTED BY US, PARTICULARL Y, WHEN WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION UNDER THE LAW TO ENTERTAIN SUCH APPEAL S. CONSEQUENTLY, WE DISMISS ALL THE APPEALS, FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. 7. HOWEVER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS F REE TO PREFER APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (CI B), CHANDIGARH, IN RIGHT FORUM, IF SO ADVISED. 8 IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE ARE DISMISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17T H JUNE, 2011. SD/- SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (H.L. KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 17TH JUNE, 2011 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE:SUB-REGISTRAR, TEHSIL OFFICE, NAKODAR. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (CIB), CHANDIGARH. 3. THE SR DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH : AMRITSAR. 9