- (1.) THE petitioner, Sub-Registrar, Suratgarh, of the Revenue Department has preferred this writ petition against Income-tax Department being aggrieved by imposition of penalty under Section 271 FA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 vide order Annex.3 dated 07.05.2010 amounting to Rs.35,300/- @ Rs.100/- per day on account of default and delay in furnishing the returns which were delayed by 353 days under Section 285 BA (i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the financial year 2006-07 giving details of the registries of conveyance- deeds etc. registered by him during such period which are so required to be submitted by him to the Income-tax Department. Before approaching this Court, the petitioner, Sub-Registrar, Suratgarh even filed an appeal before the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal against the said penalty order, which, however, came to be dismissed as not maintainable vide order dated 19.08.2009.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent, Income-tax Department, Mr. Varun Gupta, submitted that in view of coordinate bench's decision of this Court in the case of Director of Income-tax (CIB) Vs. Ravi Vijay reported in (2012) 6 Tax Corp (DT) 52616 (Rajasthan) that against the penalty order under Section 271 FA passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIB), Rajasthan, Jaipur, an appeal would lie to the CIT (Appeals), as the first appeal under Section 246A (1) (q) of the Act of 1961 and therefore the ITAT had rightly dismissed the assessee's appeal as not maintainable. The relevant para 6 of the said order is quoted below herein below: "6. The question before this Court is whether an order passed under Section 271 FA of the 1961 Act by the Director Income Tax, who holds the rank of a Commissioner in the Income Tax Department is appealable under Section 246 A (1) (q) of the 1961 Act to the Commissioner Appeals. Section 246A (1) (q) of the 1961 Act provides for appeals before the Commissioner Appeals against an order of penalty passed under Chapter 21 of the 1961 Act. Section 271FA admittedly falls within Chapter 21 of the 1961 Act. To my mind therefore on a plain reading of the said provision an appeal against an order passed by an officer of the rank of Commissioner Income Tax under Section 271FA of the 1961 Act is maintainable before the Commissioner Appeals. From a mere reading of the provision for filing appeals against orders passed under Section 271 and 272A (also under Chapter XXI) of the 1961 Act before the ITAT, this Court cannot on analogy hold that because the said orders passed by an officer of the rank of Commissioner of Income Tax should also be appealable before the ITAT. In my considered view even though orders of penalty under Section 271 and 272A of the 1961 Act fall under Chapter XXI, appeals therefrom stand excluded before the Commissioner Appeals under the general provisions of Section 246A (1) (q) by virtue of a specific provision under Section 253 (1) (c) of the (Chapter XXI) of 1961 Act. Consequently, in my view an order under Section 246A (1) (q) of the 1961 Act and no amount of interpretative exercise can displace law as enacted. Further it is an admitted fact that in the course of the demand notice under Section 156 of the 1961 Act following the order of penalty under Section 271FA of the 1961 Act, the assessee was informed that the said order was appealable before the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals) in the instant case Commissioner Appeals III Jaipur." In view of admitted legal position that an alternative remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner, Sub-Registrar against the impugned penalty order before the first appellate authority i.e. CIT (Appeals), this Court need not to go into the questions of merits on the imposition of penalty against the Sub-Registrar and he has the liberty to file appeal before the CIT (Appeals), against the penalty order dated 07.05.2010 impugned in the present writ petition.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the present writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the petitioner, Sub-Registrar that if he intend to challenge the said impugned penalty order before the CIT (Appeals), he may do so by filing appeal within one month from today and if such appeal is so filed within one month from today, the objection of limitation will not come in the way and the concerned appellate authority, namely, the CIT (Appeals) is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously on merits in accordance with law. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith. No costs.;