TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal quashes order for lack of Document Identification Number (DIN) and non-compliance with circular</h1> <h3>Shri HK Suresh Versus The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru</h3> The Tribunal found the order under Section 263 invalid as it lacked a Document Identification Number (DIN) and did not comply with CBDT Circular No. ... Revision u/s 263 - revision order does not contain the DIN - validity of the order u/s. 263 for the reason that the order issued is a manual order and does not contain Document Identification Number [DIN] which is not in accordance with the instruction of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) issued vide circular no.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 - HELD THAT:- From the perusal of facts and records it is clear that the order u/s.263 neither contains the DIN in the body of the order, nor contains the fact in the specific format as stated in Para 3 that the communication is issued manually without a DIN after obtaining the necessary approvals. Therefore we are of considered view that the impugned order is not in conformity with Para 2 and Para 3 of the CBDT circular. Respectfully following the decision of Dilip Kothari [2022 (11) TMI 33 - ITAT BANGALORE] we hold that the order passed u/s.263 is invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued as per Para 4 of the CBDT circular as the order is not conformity with Para 2 and Para 3. Appeal by the assessee is allowed. Issues Involved:1. Validity of the order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN).2. Compliance with the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Circular No. 19/2019.3. Procedural adherence for issuing manual orders without a DIN.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the Order under Section 263:The principal issue was whether the order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), was valid given that it did not contain a Document Identification Number (DIN). The assessee argued that the absence of a DIN rendered the order invalid and non-est, as per the instructions of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. The Tribunal examined whether the procedural requirements for issuing a manual order without a DIN were met.2. Compliance with CBDT Circular No. 19/2019:The Tribunal referred to the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, which mandates that no communication shall be issued by any income-tax authority unless a computer-generated DIN has been allotted and quoted in the body of such communication. The circular allows for exceptions under specific circumstances, but these must be documented, and the communication must state that it is issued manually without a DIN, along with the approval details from the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-tax.3. Procedural Adherence for Issuing Manual Orders:The Tribunal noted that the PCIT issued the order under Section 263 manually and subsequently issued an intimation with the DIN on the same date. However, the order itself did not contain the DIN or the necessary statements as required by the CBDT Circular. The Tribunal emphasized that generating the DIN by separate intimation is permissible only to regularize a manual order, provided the manual order is issued following the procedures outlined in Para 3 of the circular.Tribunal's Findings:- The Tribunal found that the order under Section 263 neither contained the DIN in its body nor mentioned the fact that it was issued manually without a DIN after obtaining the necessary approvals.- The Tribunal referenced similar cases, including the decision in Dilip Kothari v. CCIT, where it was held that an order issued manually without adhering to the CBDT Circular's requirements is invalid and deemed to have never been issued.- The Tribunal concluded that the impugned order was not in conformity with Para 2 and Para 3 of the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. Consequently, the order under Section 263 was invalid and deemed to have never been issued.Conclusion:The appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the order passed under Section 263 was quashed on the grounds of non-compliance with the CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, specifically the absence of a DIN and the failure to follow the prescribed procedures for issuing a manual order. The Tribunal's decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and maintaining transparency in tax administration.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
