9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 502 - AT - Income TaxValidity of DRP order issued without a DIN - simultaneous DIN number was generated through separate communication - HELD THAT - A perusal of the DRP order shows that it is clear in the body of DRP order, no DIN number is mentioned nor there is any reason of not mentioning the DIN number in order of the DRP. Is such a situation, the DRP order will lose its validity. Subsequent separate communication of DIN is a superfluous exercise. As relying on Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. 2023 (4) TMI 579 - DELHI HIGH COURT and in terms of paragraph 4 of the circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019, we hold that the impugned DRP order is invalid and shall be deemed to have never been passed. Accordingly, we quash the impugned DRP/AO order. Further, the issue that a simultaneous DIN number was generated and communicated have been considered by Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Abhimanyu Chaturvedi 2023 (8) TMI 378 - ITAT DELHI which says forwarding of the intimation of generation of the DIN in ITBA is only a subsequent action and that is not part of assessment order. The manner in which the word communication is defined shows every notice, order, summons, letter and any correspondence from Tax authorities should have a DIN quoted and it is for this reason that the Intimation issued about the DIN of assessment order itself has a DIN quoted on it. The generation of DIN subsequently and generation of intimation to be sent to assessee are of no consequence for the purpose of assessment and raising the demand.- Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of DRP directions and assessment proceedings due to non-compliance with CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. Summary: Issue 1: Validity of DRP Directions and Assessment Proceedings The primary issue in these appeals concerns the validity of the directions issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) and the subsequent assessment proceedings, due to non-compliance with the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14th August 2019. The assessee argued that the DRP orders did not mention a Document Identification Number (DIN), which is mandatory according to the CBDT Circular, rendering the DRP's directions invalid and the assessment proceedings null and void. The DRP orders dated 25.11.2022 lacked a DIN, and there was no recorded reason for the absence of the DIN as required by the Circular. The Circular mandates that all communications by the Income-tax Department must include a computer-generated DIN unless issued manually under exceptional circumstances with prior written approval, which must be stated in the communication. The failure to comply with these requirements results in the communication being treated as invalid and deemed to have never been issued. The Tribunal referred to the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 and emphasized its binding nature on subordinate authorities. The Tribunal also cited the Delhi High Court decision in CIT vs Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., which upheld the invalidity of communications lacking a DIN. The Tribunal concluded that the DRP orders in question were invalid due to non-compliance with the Circular, and any subsequent communication of the DIN was deemed superfluous. As a result, the Tribunal quashed the DRP/AO orders for all the assessment years under appeal, rendering the remaining grounds raised by the assessee academic and not requiring adjudication. Conclusion: All appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, and the DRP/AO orders were quashed due to non-compliance with the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. Order pronounced in the open court on this 9th day of November, 2023.
|
