TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 625
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that the copy of the approval dated 06.02.2025, annexed by the Respondents to their Affidavit-in-Reply (Page 543), does not bear a Document Identification Number (DIN). It is submitted that in the absence of a DIN, the said approval is invalid and is deemed to have never been issued as per the mandatory CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. In support of this submission, reliance is placed on the following decisions: i. Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT [2023] 154 taxmann.com 144 (Bombay) ii. Order dated 15.02.2024 in the case of Hardik Deepak Salot v. ACIT in Writ Petition No. 2944 of 2023; iii. Siemens Limited v. DCIT [2025] 181 taxmann. com 448 (Bombay) iv. CIT v. Sutherland Global Services Inc. [2025] 175 taxmann.com 897 (Madras) 3. The learned Counsel for the Respondents countered the above submission by relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rameshkumar Tulsidas Kaneriya vs. ACIT reported in 172 taxmann.com 814 (Guj). She also pointed out that an SLP against the said decision has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. She submitted that an approval is an internal document, and,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l jurisdictional document and stands on a much higher footing, more so when Circular No. 19/2019 itself specifies "approval" as one of the specified communications. The relevant findings are as under: "18. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 28th September 2021 is invalid on account of it being issued without a DIN? "(a) The CBDT, in exercise of powers under section 119(1) of the Act, has issued a Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14th August 2019 providing that no communication shall be issued by any Income-tax Authority inter alia relating to assessment orders, statutory or otherwise, inquiries, approvals, etc. to an assessee or any other person on or after 1st October 2019 unless a computer generated DIN has been allotted and is quoted in the body of such communication. The Circular reads as under: (b) It is indisputable that the impugned assessment order dated 28th September 2021 does not bear a DIN and further that the said order issued without a DIN does not bear the required format set out in paragraph 3 of the Circular and, therefore, the impugned assessment orders for Assessment Year 2011-2012 to 2019-2020 ought to be treated as invalid and deem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT v. Sutherland Global Services Inc. (supra) also held that directions issued by the DRP, a high-level body, without a DIN, were invalid and deemed to have never been issued. In fact, in paragraph 12, the Court dealt with the argument that though there was no DIN on the directions issued by the DRP, the final assessment order carried a valid DIN, and therefore, there is no infirmity. This argument was specifically repelled by the Madras High Court. The relevant findings in this regard are as under: "12. From the third question of law raised by appellant, it could be seen that their stand is that even assuming that the proceedings of DRP did not contain a valid DIN, the subsequent assessment orders which were impugned had a valid DIN and therefore ITAT erred in setting aside the assessment orders. It is their case that the proceedings of the DRP is not an order of an income tax authority and therefore, the circular requiring the generation of DIN would not be applicable to DRP proceedings. This submission cannot hold water. 13. Firstly, on facts, it is the case of appellant that there was a DIN generated and it was written in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....BDT Circular which covers a notice, order, summons, letter and any correspondence (which has been defined as 'communication' in the CBDT Circular). The fact that paragraph 2 stipulates "that no communication shall be issued by any Income-tax authority relating to assessment, appeals, orders, statutory or otherwise, exemptions, enquiry, investigation, verification of information, penalty, prosecution, rectification, approval etc., to the assessee" on or after 1.10.2019 would squarely cover the impugned order, and unless a DIN is quoted on the face of the impugned order, the impugned order is to be treated as invalid and deemed to never have been issued. .... 22. Based on the aforesaid judgments, we have observed that the judgments of this Court in Ashok Commercial Enterprises (supra) and Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) and the Madras High Court in Laserwoods US Inc (supra) have not been stayed and the mere fact that the orders of the Delhi High Court in Brandix Mauritius Holdings Lid (supra), Calcutta High Court in Tata Medical Centre Trust (supra) and the Madras High Court in Sutherland Global Services Inc (supra) are stayed by the Supreme Court, does no....