2014 (1) TMI 1296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee on the ground of personal inconvenience. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the issue raised in this appeal is covered matter against the assessee. Therefore, it may not be necessary to adjourn the appeals in view of the order of the Tribunal on an identical matter. For the purpose of convenience, the observations made in the order of the Tribunal in the case of the Sub-Registrar, Alakode, Kannur Dist in ITA No.212/Coch/2013 in pars 4 to 8 are reproduced hereunder: "4. We have considered rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. The question arises for consideration is whether this Tribunal could entertain an appeal by the Sub Registrar, Meppayur-Kozhikode against the order of pen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Dispute Resolution Panel or an order passed under section 154 in respect of such order." 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 271FA is appealable before this Tribunal. This Tribunal being a quasi judicial authority established under the provisions of the Income Tax Act cannot travel beyond the provisions of the Act. Therefore, unless and until an appeal is specifically provided section 253 of the Act against the order levying penalty u/s 271FA, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the present appeal is not maintainable before this Tribunal. 5. Now coming to the direction given by the Director of Inc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 253 of the Act. Therefore, merely because the remedy available us/ 246A(q) of the Act may not be effective and efficious that alone will not give any jurisdiction to this Tribunal to entertain this appeal. 7. Further, we are of the considered opinion that when the provisions of section 271FA was introduced in the statute book by the Finance Act, 2004 with effect from 1.4.2005 the consequential amendment to section 253 was omitted to be carried out. This omission may be unintended. One may argue that an appeal is provided against the order of penalty u/s 271 in 253(1)(a) and 253(10(c ) of the Act, therefore, all branches of section 271 i.e. from 271A to 271G are included in section. This argument may not be correct because section 271....