ITAT Delhi: Appeals on IT Act Sec. 200A orders not maintainable, rectification petitions advised

Income Tax Officer, Ward 49(5), New Delhi Versus ARDEE Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., & Others

Income Tax Officer, Ward 49(5), New Delhi Versus ARDEE Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., & Others - TMI Issues:
Appeal against CIT (A)'s order being perverse and erroneous, maintainability of appeals against order u/s 200A of the IT Act, contradictory directions by CIT (A), rectification petition under Section 154 for modifying order u/s 200A.

Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal ITAT, Delhi dealt with eight appeals filed by the department challenging the order of the CIT (A) dated 08.06.2012 in the cases of different assesses. The department contended that the CIT (A)'s order was perverse and erroneous as he dismissed the appeal of the deductor assessee, stating that the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 200A of the IT Act, 1961 was not appealable u/s 246A, yet directed the Assessing Officer to rectify mistakes in the order within two months. Despite non-appearance of the assessees, the Tribunal proceeded ex parte as the issues could be decided without their presence.

During the hearing, the department argued that the CIT (A)'s order was self-contradictory as he held the order of the Assessing Officer not appealable under section 246A but also directed for appeal effect within two months. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in the case of "M/s Air India Limited" and observed that when the CIT (A) deems appeals not maintainable against the order u/s 200A, there is no question of giving effect to his order. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision that the appeals were not maintainable, expunged the direction for appeal effect, and advised the assessee to file a rectification petition under Section 154 for modifying the order passed u/s 200A.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the department's appeals deeming them allowed for statistical purposes, following the directions given in a previous case. The Tribunal's decision was based on the principle that appeals against orders u/s 200A are not maintainable, and rectification petitions under Section 154 should be filed for correcting mistakes in such orders.