Fayaz Ahmed Beig Vs ITO (ITAT Amritsar)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar, heard the appeal of Fayaz Ahmed Beig against the CIT(A)’s dismissal, which stemmed from an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act for a total income of ₹19.11 lakhs. The original assessment was initiated based on information concerning a cash deposit of ₹10.16 lakhs and financial transactions totaling ₹26.94 lakhs. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to the assessee’s non-representation.
Before the ITAT, the primary contention raised by the assessee’s counsel was the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the assessment order dated December 3, 2019, and the corresponding notice of demand under Section 156. The assessee relied on CBDT Circular No. 19/2019, arguing that any communication issued after October 1, 2019, without a DIN (or an exceptional circumstance reason) is invalid and deemed never issued.
The Departmental Representative (DR) countered that the DIN issue was raised for the first time before the Tribunal, not in the original grounds of appeal, and asserted that a DIN was separately generated on December 3, 2019, for the order.
The ITAT noted the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-representation and that the DIN issue was not adjudicated upon by the first appellate authority. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the entire matter back to the CIT(A) for readjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the original grounds of appeal on their merits and to consider all legal issues, including the DIN issue. The assessee must be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard, with notices issued to the email ID provided in Form No. 35. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
