DRP order without DIN number is invalid and deemed never passed, subsequent DIN communication cannot cure defect

The ITAT Delhi held that a DRP order lacking a DIN number is invalid and deemed never to have been passed. The tribunal found that the DRP order contained no DIN number in its body without any explanation for this omission. A subsequent separate communication providing the DIN number was considered a superfluous exercise that could not cure the defect. Relying on Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. and Circular No. 19/2019, the tribunal quashed the impugned DRP/AO order. The decision was made in favor of the assessee.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of DRP order due to absence of a valid computer-generated DIN.
2. Consequential validity of the final assessment order.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of DRP Order Due to Absence of a Valid Computer-Generated DIN
The assessee raised additional grounds questioning the validity of the DRP order dated 15/12/2022 and 16/12/2022, arguing that the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) contravened CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. The Circular mandates that no communication shall be issued without a computer-generated DIN unless specific exceptions apply, and any communication issued without a DIN shall be treated as invalid. The Tribunal noted that the DRP order did not mention a DIN nor provided reasons for its absence, rendering the order void ab initio. The Tribunal referenced the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT vs Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., which confirmed that communications without a DIN are non-est in law.

Issue 2: Consequential Validity of the Final Assessment Order
Given the invalidity of the DRP order, the final assessment order dated 20/01/2023, passed under section 147 read with section 144C(13) of the Act, was also deemed null and void. The Tribunal emphasized that subsequent communication of a DIN is superfluous if the DIN is not mentioned in the body of the original communication. The Tribunal also referred to the case of Abhimanyu Chaturvedi vs DCIT, reiterating that a DIN must be quoted on the order before it is signed to be valid.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal quashed the DRP and AO orders due to the absence of a valid DIN, rendering the remaining grounds academic. All appeals filed by the assessee were allowed.

Order Pronounced:
The judgment was delivered on 06th November 2023.

---