Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 1456/Del/2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 30/05/2023
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

Introduction: The recent decision in the cross-appeals between Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd. and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi sheds light on the critical aspect of Document Identification Number (DIN) in assessment orders. The appellant contested the validity of the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18, emphasizing the absence of a DIN.

Background: The appeal, labeled ITA No. 1456/Del/2021, brought forth an additional ground challenging the assessment order’s validity due to the absence of a DIN. The appellant argued that the order, dated 31.12.2019, violated Circular No. 19/2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which mandated the use of DIN in all communications issued by income-tax authorities.

Legal Framework: Circular No. 19/2019, dated 14.08.2019, mandated the use of a computer-generated DIN in all communications issued by income-tax authorities after October 1, 2019. It provided exceptions under certain circumstances where manual communication was allowed, subject to recording reasons in writing and obtaining prior approval from Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-tax. The circular explicitly stated that any communication not conforming to these conditions would be treated as invalid and deemed to have never been issued.

Appellant’s Argument: The appellant, relying on Circular No. 19/2019, argued that the assessment order was invalid as it did not contain a DIN. The appellant highlighted that the circular required specific information, including reasons for manual communication, to be recorded in the body of the order along with the approval number and date from the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-tax. The appellant referred to a decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. to support their contention.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031