9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 998X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainable appeal. One can clearly understand that the letter issued by the Ld. ITO, Ward-1, Visakhapatnam dated 10/05/2019 is nothing but a response to the letter filed by the assessee seeking waive-off of late filing fee imposed by the Ld. AO. Therefore it is not an appealable order before the Appellate Authorities as described in the provisions of the IT Act, 1961. CIT(A)-NFAC has rightly concluded that the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee cannot be adjudicated on merits since the appeal itself is not maintainable and therefore dismissed in limine. We have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC s order holds good as there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC and accordingly no interference is required. Assessee appeal dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 236, 237 And 238/Viz/2022 - - - Dated:- 21-4-2023 - Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon ble Judicial Member And Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon ble Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, AR For the Respondent : Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. AR ORDER PER S. BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned three appeals are filed by the assessee against the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act, 1961 [the Act]. Aggrieved by the decision of the Ld. AO levying the late filing fee U/s. 234E of the Act, the assessee filed a letter dated 24th January, 2019 seeking waiver of late filing fee and rectification U/s. 154 before the Ld. ITO (TDS), Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. The Ld. ITO vide letter dated 10/5/2019 rejected the application for waive-off of demand considering the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by stating that there is no scope for waive-off of late filing fee U/s. 234E of the Act. Aggrieved by the letter of the Ld. ITO dated 10/5/2019, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. 6. Before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee contested the denial of the waive-off letter dated 10/5/2019 issued by the Ld. ITO (TDS) Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC dismissed the appeal in-limine as it is not maintainable since the appeal is filed against the letter for waive-off of late filing fee and not against the order for levying of penalty U/s. 234E of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC also observed that as per the provisions of section 246 of the IT Act, 1961, an appeal can be filed against assessment, penalty order or against intimation however, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Later on, the assessee filed a letter on 24/01/2019 seeking waive-off of late fee and rectification U/s. 154 before the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO did not pass any rectification order since it is not a petition U/s. 154. However, the Ld. ITO (TDS), Ward-1, Visakhapatnam responded to the assessee s letter stating that the waive-off of the late filing fee is out of his scope. In our view the assessee ought to have filed a petition seeking rectification of the order passed by the Ld. AO instead of filing a letter. However, the assessee filed an appeal based on the letter issued by the Ld. ITO (TDS), Ward-1, Visakhapatnam instead of filing the appeal against the intimation. Considering these facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, following the provisions of section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine as the same is not a maintainable appeal. The decision of the Ld.CIT (A)-NFAC is given in para 7.2 of his order and it is extracted herein below for reference: 7.2. Bare perusal of the above section shows that letter issued for recovery of dues is not appealable. Letter dated 10/05/2019 has been issued by Income Tax Officer (TDS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an order made under section 237; (j) an order imposing a penalty under (A) section 221; or (B) section 271, section 271A, section 271F, section 272AA or section 272BB; (C) section 272, section 272B or section 273, as they stood immediately before the 1st day of April, 1989, in respect of an assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment years; (k) an order of assessment made by an Assessing Officer under clause (c) of section 158BC, in respect of search initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets requisitioned under section 132A on or after the 1st day of January, 1997; (l) an order imposing a penalty under sub-section (2) of section 158BFA; (m) an order imposing penalty under section 271B or section 271BB; (n) an order made by a Deputy Commissioner imposing a penalty under section 271C, section 271D or section 271E; (o) an order made by a Deputy Commissioner or a Deputy Director imposing a penalty under section 272A; (p) an order made by a Deputy Commissioner imposing a penalty under section 272AA; (q) an order imposing a penalty under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
