TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1378
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e impugned revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act, therefore, we proceed to adjudicate the said legal issue first. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, inviting our attention to the CBDT Circular No.19 of 2019 dated 14.08.2019, has submitted that as per the aforesaid circular, non-mentioning of the DIN Number on the body of the order makes the order as invalid and deemed to have never been issued. The ld. Counsel has further relied upon the decisions of the Coordinate Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Tata Medical Centre Trust vs. CIT reported in [2022] 140 taxman.com 431 (Kolkata Trib.) and in the case of Smt. Sunita Agarwal vs. ITO, ITA No.432/Kol/2020 decided vide order dated 22.11.22. 4. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that mere non-mentioning of DIN does not invalidate the order and further that the Circular of the CBDT is directory in nature and not binding on this Tribunal. 5. We have considered the rival submission. We find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Tata Medical Centre Trust vs. CIT (supra). The relevant part of the order of the Tribunal for the sake of ready r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uance or communication electronically; or (ii) when communication regarding enquiry, verification etc. is required to be issued by an income-tax authority, who is outside the office, for discharging his official duties; or (iii) when due to delay in PAN migration PAN is lying with non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer; or (iv) when PAN or assessee is not available and where a proceeding under the Act (other than verification under section 131 or section 133 of the Act) is sought to be initiated; or (v) When the functionality to issue communication is not available in the system, the communication may be issued manually but only after recording reasons in writing in the file and with prior written approval of the Chief Commissioner/ Director General of income- tax. In cases where manual communication is required to be issued due to delay in PAN migration, the proposal seeking approval for issuance of manual communication shall include the reason for delay in PAN migration. The communication issued under aforesaid circumstances shall state the fact that the communication is issued manually without a DIN and the date of obtaining of the writ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., statutory or otherwise, exemptions, enquiry, investigation, verification of information, penalty, prosecution, rectification, approval etc. to the assessee or any other person, on or after the 01.10.2019 unless a computer generated DIN has been allotted and is duly quoted in the body of such communication. We note that para 3 of the said circular provides for certain exceptional circumstances when the communication is issued manually, in which case such manually issued communications should contain the fact that the said 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 said manual communication in the prescribed format. Thus, it is observed from the said circular that all the communications mentioned therein have to be either generated and issued electronically with DIN or in certain exceptional circumstances the communication may be issued manually without DIN, fact of which along with its written approval has to be stated in the body of the said communication, failing which, para 4 of the said circular states that such communication shall be treated as 'invalid'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Counsel pointed out that on the top left corner it bears a Bar Code. Further, in the box on the top of right hand side it bears a DIN and Notice No. Also, in the body of the notice, it mentions about the fact that document is digitally signed. Further, in the left bottom of the said notice, there is a legend put with an asterisk (*) mark which says 'DIN'. 12.5 In contrast to this, attention of the bench was invited, both to the show cause notice issued pursuant to revisionary proceeding u/s. 263 of the Act dated 23.03.2021 placed at pages 55 to 57 of the paper book, which was issued manually and does not bear any reference to DIN in terms of CBDT circular so also the impugned order passed u/s. 263 which is also issued manually and does not bear any reference to DIN as required by the CBDT circular. The first page and the last two pages of the impugned order are reproduced hereunder for reference, in the context of quoting DIN as contemplated by CBDT circular: 13. From the above submissions and arguments, we note that it is an undisputed fact that the impugned order u/s. 263 of the Act has been issued manually which does not bear the signature of the authority pass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the guidelines issued by the Board in exercise of powers in terms of section 119 of the Act relaxing the rigours of law are binding on all the officers responsible for implementation of the Act and, therefore, bound to follow and observe any such orders, instructions and directions of the Board. 13.4 In the decision of DCIT v. Sunita Finlease Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 491 (CG,) it was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in para 16 that the administrative Instruction No. 9/2004 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes is binding on administrative officer in view of the statutory provision contained in section 143(2), which provides for limitation of 12 months for issuance of notice under section 143(2). While giving its finding, the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh placed reliance on the decisions in the case of UCO Bank (supra) and Nayana P. Dedhia (supra). 13.5 Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Calcutta in the case of Amal Kumar Ghosh [2014] 361 ITR 458 (Cal) dealt with the issue relating to CBDT circular which according to the Department cannot defeat the provisions of law. While giving its observations and fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Ld. CIT(E) is invalid and deemed to have never been issued as it fails to mention DIN in its body by adhering to the CBDT circular no. 19 of 2019. Accordingly, additional ground taken by the assessee is allowed. Having so held on the legal issue raised by the assessee in the additional ground, the grounds relating to the merits of the case requires no adjudication. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of above observations and findings." 6. The facts of the case in hand are squarely covered by the above decision of the Coordinate Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal (The Judicial Member, herein, being party to the said decision) in the case of "Tata medical Centre Trust" (supra). 7. It is further pertinent to note here that in its recent judgment in the case of "Pradeep Goyel vs. UOI" reported in [2022] 141 taxmanc.com 64(SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, taking note of the aforesaid CBDT Circular of 2019 to implement the DIN system and also in view of the larger interest and to bring transparency and accountability in the indirect tax administration also, has directed Union of India and GST council to issue advisory/instruction/recommendations....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ministration and, as on today, the same has been implemented only by two States, i.e., the States of Karnataka and Kerala. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that GST Council as per Article 279A of the Constitution of India can make recommendations to the States on any matter relating to GST. Therefore, when implementation of the DIN system is in the larger public interest and the objective to implement the DIN system is to bring in transparency and accountability in the indirect tax administration, it is prayed to direct the respondents - States to implement the DIN system. It is prayed to direct the Central Government / CBIC / GST Council to issue directions to the concerned States to implement the DIN system in respect of all communications sent by the State Tax Officers to assessees, taxpayers and other concerned persons. 3. On the copy of the writ petition being served pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 11.07.2022, Shri Balbir Singh, learned ASG has appeared on behalf of Union of India. He has submitted that Union of India does not dispute that by implementing a system for electronic (digital) generation of a DIN, it will bri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation Number (DIN) for all communications sent by the State Tax Officers to taxpayers and other concerned persons would be in the larger public interest and enhance good governance. It will bring in transparency and accountability in the indirect tax administration, which are so vital to efficient governance. Even the Central Government has also taken a decision and as such implemented the DIN system of Central Board of Direct Taxes and on and from 01.10.2019, as every CBDT communication will have to have a Document Identification Number (DIN). But, as on today, only two States, namely, the States of Karnataka and Kerala have implemented the system for electronic (digital) generation of a DIN in the indirect tax administration, which is laudable and to be appreciated. 7. In view of the implementation of the GST and as per Article 279A of the Constitution of India, the GST Council is empowered to make recommendations to the States on any matter relating to GST. The GST Council can also issue advisories to the respective States for implementation of the DIN system, which shall be in the larger public interest and which may bring in transparency and accountability in the ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Notice No : ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-21/1028167761(1) Sir/Madam/ M/s. Subject: Proceedings under section 154 - Notice The assossmont/rofund order under section 143(3) for the assessment year 2016-17 requires to be amended as there is a mistake apparent form the record within the meaning of section 154/155 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rectification of the mistake, as per particular given below, will have the effect of enhancing the assessment /reducing the refund/ increasing your liability. If you wish to be heard, you are requested to file your submission online on or before 09.10.2020 at 11.30 A.M. Alternatively you may send a written reply so as to reach me on or before the date mentioned above. Particulars of mistake proposed to be rectified. 1. On verification of records, It is revealed that the assosscc had earned interest income amounting to Rs 91.37 lacs on corpus funds and Rs 27.31 lacs on 'Other earmarked funds". It is observed that though interest received under on 91.37 lacs had been added back to the income side as per I&E account in the assessment order, interest income received on earmarked fund (Rs 21.31 lacs) has not been tak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (ii) In the instant case, the assessee claimed 'Provision for doubtful debts amounting to Rs.37.40 lakh under the head Other expenses as application of fund. As per provision of the Act, mere provision would not be allowable as a deduction and the actual writing off of the debt was a necessary pre-condition. Therefore, only the actual expenditures made during the year can be treated as application. As such, the said amount of Rs.37.40 lakh is required to be added back to the income of the assessee. Scrutiny of the assessment order revealed that, an amount of Rs.5,18.29.615 has been deducted towards Apportion from patient care fund (SL. 461) of the table at paragraph 4 of the order from Total income as per I&E A/c', while computing taxable income of the assessee for the AY 2016-17. Further scrutiny revealed that the assessee had actually added the said amount as 'receipt" under the head In view of the above, the Assessing Officer has erred in allowing capital expenditure of Rs. 4989.53 lakhs towards addition to fixed assets and Rs. 447.4 lakhs towards WIP, which resulted in loss of revenue and therefore, is prejudicial to the interest ....