RAVINDRA N CHITALE, Pune V. ITO, Pune

ITA 674/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 67424514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 673/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) SHAM V. CHAVAN FLAT NO. 302, HARSHWARDHAN APARTMENTS, SAHAKAR NAGAR, PARVATI, PUNE 411 009 PAN : AAQPC 9426 J . APPELLANT VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV PUNE . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 674/PN/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) RAVINDRA N. CHITALE 5-A/4, NEW FRIENDS CO-OP HSG. SOC. VANAZ CORNER, PAUD ROAD KOTHRUD, PUNE 411 038 PAN : ABUPC 2626 H . APPELLANT VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : MR. NIKHIL PATHAK RESPONDENT BY : MR. ACHAL SHARMA DATE OF HEARING : 17-04-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29-04-2013 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THE CAPTIONED TWO APPEAL HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY TH E TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES AND ARISE OUT OF SEPARATE SIMILARLY WORDE D ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV, PUNE, PASSED UNDER S ECTION 264 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 25. 01.2012 AND 02.02.2012 ITA NOS. 673 & 674/PN/2012 A.YS. 2007-08 & 2 008-09 PERTAINING TO SHAM V. CHAVAN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 07-08 AND RAVINDRA N. CHITALE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 RESPECTIVELY. 2. WHEN THE CAPTIONED APPEALS WERE CALLED FOR HEARI NG, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEES FAIRLY CONCEDED THE POSIT ION THAT THE IMPUGNED APPEALS WERE NOT MAINTAINABLE HAVING REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 253(1) OF THE ACT. SECTION 253(1) OF THE ACT ENUMER ATES THE ORDERS AGAINST WHICH THE APPEALS ARE PERMISSIBLE TO BE FILED BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL. AS A RESULT OF THE AFORESAID POSITION THE CAPTIONED APPEALS ARE LI ABLE TO DISMISSED AS NON- MAINTAINABLE. 3. HOWEVER, AN INCIDENTAL PLEA HAS ALSO BEEN RAISED TO THE EFFECT THAT WHILE FILING THE IMPUGNED APPEALS, THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSE ES HAVE DEPOSITED TRIBUNAL FEE OF RS. 10,000/- IN TERMS OF SECTION 25 3(6) OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEALS BEING NON-MAINTAINABLE, THE TRIBUNAL FEE IS ALSO LIABLE TO BE REFUNDED AND THAT THE BENCH MAY PASS SUITABLE DIRECTIONS. THE LEARNED COUNSEL REFERRED T O A PRECEDENT BY WAY OF THE DECISION OF THE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF KIRANJIT SINGH VS. ACIT (2006) 101 TTJ (ASR.) 424 IN SOMEWHAT SIMILAR CIRCU MSTANCES. 4. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE APPEARIN G FOR THE REVENUE DID NOT MAKE ANY SPECIFIC SUBMISSION IN THE MATTER FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAME RELATED TO PROCEDURE FOR FILING OF APPEALS BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, AFTER HEARING THE PA RTIES, WE FIND THAT CAPTIONED ASSESSEES ARE ENTITLED TO REFUND OF THE T RIBUNAL FEE PAID INASMUCH AS THE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAD BEEN WRONGLY FILED AND ARE IN ANY CASE, NOT MAINTAINABLE BECAUSE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV ARE NOT APPEALABLE BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L IN TERMS OF SECTION 253(1) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE EXCESS TRIBUNAL FEE PAID IS DIRECTED TO BE REFUNDED TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES. ITA NOS. 673 & 674/PN/2012 A.YS. 2007-08 & 2 008-09 7. RESULTANTLY, THE CAPTIONED APPEALS ARE DISMISSED AS NON-MAINTAINABLE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH APRIL, 2013. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 29 TH APRIL, 2013 SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT- IV , PUNE; 4) THE DR, B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 5) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., PUNE