2022 (9) TMI 496 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee's Appeal Dismissed for Penalty Order under Section 271FA

Honey Dew Holiday & Forex Pvt. Ltd. Versus The DIT (I & CI), Ahmedabad

The appeal filed by the Assessee against the penalty order under section 271FA was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad, citing lack of ... Maintainability of appeal u/s. 253 as against an order passed by the Director of Income Tax (I&CI) levying penalty u/s. 271FA r.w.s. 274 - appeal against the order levying penalty u/s 274 r.w.s. 271FA against this tribunal - HELD THAT:- It is settled principle of law that nowhere in section 253 mentions the order passed by Director of Income-tax (Intelligence) or any other officer of the Income- tax Department levying penalty u/s 271 FA is appealable before this Tribunal. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal being a quasi judicial authority established under the provisions of the Income-tax Act cannot travel beyond the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, unless and until an appeal is specifically provided in section 253 of the Act, against the order levying penalty u/s 271FA, we are of the considered opinion that the present appeal is not maintainable before this Tribunal. Respectfully following the decision SRO, MEPPAYUR-KOZHIKODE VERSUS DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTELLIGENCE), COCHI [2014 (1) TMI 102 - ITAT COCHIN]the present appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable in law and therefore the same is dismissed in limine. The assessee is at liberty to file appropriate legal remedy against this impugned order, in the manner known to law. Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Issues:Appeal against penalty order under section 271FA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Maintainability of appeal before Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad.Detailed Analysis:1. Delay in Filing Appeal:The appeal was filed against the penalty order passed under section 271FA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The Registry noted a delay of 189 days in filing the appeal. The assessee sought condonation of delay, attributing it to misplacement of the order received by the company's Accountant. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.2. Maintainability of Appeal:The Revenue contended that the appeal is not maintainable under section 253 of the Act against the penalty order passed by the Director of Income Tax (I&CI) under section 271FA. Citing a Cochin Bench Tribunal case, it was argued that no appeal is provided under the Act against the penalty levied under section 271FA. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 253 and concluded that the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable before the Tribunal.3. Legislative Intent and Jurisdiction:The Tribunal highlighted that the consent or direction of the Director of Income-tax does not confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal unless provided for by the legislature. It was observed that although an appeal is provided under section 246A(q) for penalties under Chapter XXI, the Tribunal cannot entertain appeals beyond the provisions of section 253. The Tribunal noted an unintended omission in the consequential amendment to section 253 regarding appeals against penalties under section 271FA.4. Dismissal of Appeal:Based on the above analysis, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, emphasizing that unless an appeal is specifically provided in section 253 against the penalty under section 271FA, the appeal is not maintainable before the Tribunal. The assessee was given the liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies against the impugned order through the appropriate forum.In conclusion, the appeal filed by the Assessee against the penalty order under section 271FA was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad, citing the lack of maintainability under section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific provisions for appeals against penalties under section 271FA and highlighted the legislative intent regarding jurisdiction and appellate remedies.