SUB Vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (CIB), CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 105, 106, 108, 109 and 151 of 2017 as the Tribunal vide one consolidated order dated 06.09.2016 impugned in these appeals decided the same. However, the facts are being extracted from the ITA No.105 of 2017.

(2.) ITA No. 105 of 2017 has been preferred by the appellant Sub-Registrar, Bhiwani under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 06.09.2016, Annexure.9, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Division Bench "Friday-C", New Delhi (in short, "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 5737/DEL/2012, for the financial year 2008-09, claiming following substantial questions of law:-

(3.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in ITA No.105 of 2017 may be noticed. The appellant, Sub Registrar, Bhiwani is engaged in registration of sale deeds under the Registration Act, 1908 (in short, "the 1908 Act") and various other activities assigned by the State Government as well as the Deputy Commissioner in the District. He was posted as such at Bhiwani with effect from 16.08.2010. As per the new provision inserted in the year 2005 of the Act, the Registrar or Sub Registrar appointed under Section 6 of the 1908 Act was required to file Annual Information Returns (AIR) in respect of transactions of purchase or sale by any person of immovable property valuing Rs. 30 lakhs or more. The due date for filing the Annual Information Returns was 31st August immediately following the financial year in which the transaction was registered or recorded. In the event of failure to furnish such information, penalty was leviable under Section 271FA of the Act. There was delay in filing AIR for the five consecutive financial years starting from 2004-05, as per the consolidated order dated 06.01.2011 passed by the Director of Income Tax (CIB), Chandigarh. Show cause notice was issued on 6.09.2010 asking the filer to show cause as to why penalty under Section 271FA of the Act should not be imposed upon it for failure to furnish the AIR in time. The reply was sought by 27.09.2010. On 22.11.21010, an official from the office of the filer attended the hearing and requested for adjournment as the filer was unable to attend the hearing. He was also asked to file necessary copy of provisional receipts for the financial years 2007-08 and 2008-09 as a proof of having filed the AIR. On 29.11.2010, the appellant filed copy of provisional receipt for the financial year 2007-08 along with its written reply stating therein the reasonable cause for not filing the AIR in time. The Director of Income Tax (CIB), Chandigarh held the appellant liable for penalty under Section 271FA of the Act for the financial years under consideration. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] on 20.05.2011. Vide order dated 21.08.2012, Annexure A.4, the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant following the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Patan Nagrik Sarkari Bank v. DIT, (2011) 240 CTR 113 whereby penalty up to the date of service of first notice was cancelled and for the remaining period the same was sustained. Still not satisfied, the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 09.02.2015, Annexure A.7, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. The Tribunal had given findings on ground No.1 only and remaining grounds 2 to 4 remained unattended. Therefore, the appellant filed miscellaneous application seeking rectification of the order passed by the Tribunal. Vide order dated 06.09.2016, Annexure A.9, the said application was dismissed by the Tribunal. Hence, the instant appeals by the appellant.