JUDGMENT
S.G. Mohapata, J.
1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-Lax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), at the instance of the assessee.
2.
This court directed the Tribunal to state a case on the following question of law :
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right not to allow the entire sum of Rs. 42,942 as deduction on the ground that the assessee did not file any appeal or cross-objection in respect of the appeal registered as I. T. A. No. 67/CTK of 1977-78 filed before the Tribunal ?”
3. The assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Orissa Cooperative Societies Act, 1962. In respect of the assessment year 1975-76, the assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 42,942 which was claimed to have been spent in the construction of a school building at Tora. This expenditure was asserted to be towards labour welfare expenses. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim for exemption. In appeal by the assessee, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed a sum of Rs. 8,590 out of the same to be exempted finding that the said amount was spent towards labour welfare expenses. The assessee remained satisfied with the appellate order and did not prefer any appeal. The Revenue was not satisfied with the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Even after receipt of notice, no cross-objection was filed by the assessee in respect of that part of the amount which was rejected. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Department. Thereafter, taking the assistance of some of the findings of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee filed an application under Section 256(1) of the Act before the Tribunal to state a case to this court. The Tribunal having refused to state a case, an application was filed in this court and a statement was called for on the question of law as extracted earlier.
4. When the assessee has not preferred any appeal or cross-objection, there was no scope for the Tribunal to disturb the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the assessee which has become final. Mr. Ray, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Tribunal has power to pass such other order as it considers proper which includes also the power to grant relief or exemption of the balance amount for which no appeal or cross- objection was filed by the assessee.
5. The Tribunal is a creature of the statute. It is to exercise that much of power which is provided under the statute and can exercise powers ancillary to the power vested. It has no wide power to grant relief where appeal or cross-objection is not preferred since the same is not ancillary to the main power. We are satisfied that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in not allowing Rs. 42,942 as deduction on the ground that the assessee had not filed any appeal or cross-objection in respect of the appeal registered as Income-tax Appeal No. 67/CTK of 1977-78 filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal.
6.
The question is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. There shall be no order as to costs.
J.M. Mahapatra, J.
7. I agree.