2023 (11) TMI 186 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Voids Tax Orders Due to Missing Document ID Number, Upholds Procedural Compliance for Validity.

Toyoda Micromatic Machinery India Private Limited, C/o- JTEKT India Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-25 (1), Delhi

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the transfer pricing order and the ... TP order u/s 92CA without quoting the mandatory DIN - simultaneous DIN number was generated and communicated - assessee submitted that the TPO order doesn’t bear DIN in the light of Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 - HELD THAT:- As decided in ABHIMANYU CHATURVEDI, MALLIKA CHATURVEDI, ALKA CHATURVEDI VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, NOIDA [2023 (8) TMI 378 - ITAT DELHI] 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. Thus simultaneous issue of the DIN number is insignificant and superfluous exercise, in the absence of mentioning the DIN number on the body of the communication. Hence, the grounds taken up for discussion are decided in favour of the assessee. Issues involved:The appeal challenges the order of the Assessing Officer/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, regarding the transfer pricing order and the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel for the assessment year 2017-18.Transfer Pricing Order without DIN:The main issue raised by the assessee was that the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) issued the transfer pricing order under section 92CA of the Income Tax Act without quoting the mandatory Document Identification Number (DIN) as required by Circular No.19/2019. The assessee argued that the absence of DIN rendered the TPO order void-ab-initio, and the same applied to the order of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) as well.Validity of Communication without DIN:The assessee contended that the absence of DIN in the communication, including the DRP order, violated the CBDT Circular requirements. The assessee argued that the entire proceeding was vitiated due to the lack of DIN in the communication.Decision and Ruling:The Tribunal noted that the transfer pricing order did not contain a DIN, which was a requirement as per Circular No.19/2019. Referring to a previous case, the Tribunal highlighted that the generation and communication of DIN were essential for compliance. The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of DIN rendered the orders null and void. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the TPO's and DRP's orders were set aside, and the assessment order was deemed null and void. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee based on the non-compliance with the DIN requirement, making other grounds irrelevant.Conclusion:The Tribunal found the absence of DIN in the transfer pricing order and communication to be a critical flaw, leading to the decision in favor of the assessee. The failure to comply with the DIN requirement rendered the orders null and void, resulting in the allowance of the appeal. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural requirements, such as the mandatory quoting of DIN, in tax assessments and related communications.