9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 941X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Bench to the ld. Senior DR to point out how a DIN intimation letter along with the manual order as explained by ld. CIT(Exemption) in his reply fulfils the categorical requirement mandated by CBDT circular in its para 2 that the body of the communication (order u/s 263 in the present case) must contain the fact that the communication is issued manually without a DIN and the date of obtaining of the written approval of the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-tax for issue of manual communication in the prescribed format, nothing was placed to substantiate the same. Revenue has sought to rectify the order by submitting in its miscellaneous application that the DIN Number has been generated on 3103/2021 while passing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21/1032080493(1)) has been generated on 3103/2021 while passing the order. 2. In this respect Ld. Senior DR made a submission dated 23.11.2022 containing reply dated 21.11.2022 received from the office of Ld. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata. In this reply, Ld. CIT(Exemption) made a submission to clarify that the impugned order under section 263 of the Act was passed manually on 31.03.2021 which was duly issued to the assessee through system vide DIN: ITBA/REV/M/REV5/2020-21/9241(1) which was communicated to the assessee vide intimation letter DIN: ITBA/REV/S/91/2020- 21/1032080493(1) Dated 31.03.2021. It is further stated that any communication including orders/notices when generated manually are to be uploaded in the system through manual or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resent order manually without a DIN by obtaining approval from prescribed authority in the prescribed format is mentioned/quoted in the body of the impugned order and, therefore, even if the case records are verified, it will not serve any purpose since the impugned order itself does not contain any such factual notation as contemplated in para 3 of the CBDT circular. 4. Ld. Counsel, stated that it is undisputed and verifiable fact, duly acknowledged by the Revenue that the impugned order under section 263 is passed manually and its body does not contain DIN nor any notation in the prescribed format that it is issued manually without quoting DIN by obtaining prior approval of Chief Commissioner/Director General. 5. According to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ither physically or through email and was downloaded by us on our own accord from the income tax portal. 6. Further, Ld. Counsel furnished screenshots from the IT portal to demonstrate that Closure order as available on the IT portal contained only the impugned manual order under section 263 without DIN intimation letter. The screenshots are also reproduced below: 7. Bench raised a query to the ld. Senior DR to demonstrate the fact of email of DIN intimation letter as claimed by the ld. CIT(Exemption) in his reply. To this effect, nothing corroborative was placed on record except of a general statement that it must have gone to the registered email ID of the assessee. On this, in addition to the affidavit referred above, ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Email Details Delivered 01/04/2021 05:29:41 AM 01/04/2021 05:29:45 AM 03/04/2021 04:01:39 AM 8. On a specific query by the Bench to the ld. Senior DR to point out how a DIN intimation letter along with the manual order as explained by ld. CIT(Exemption) in his reply fulfils the categorical requirement mandated by CBDT circular in its para 2 that the body of the communication (order u/s 263 in the present case) must contain the fact that the communication is issued manually without a DIN and the date of obtaining of the written approval of the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-tax for issue of manual communication in the prescribed format, nothing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
