CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-1, AGRA, AGRA V. AMIT KUMAR GUPTA, MAINPURI , MAINPURI U>P.

MA 2/AGR/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around a miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, which had declared the assessment orders as non-est due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the original assessment orders. The Revenue contended that the DIN was generated and communicated as per the prerequisites mentioned in the CBDT Circular. However, the Tribunal found that the DIN was not generated for the original assessment but for the revision proceedings, which affected the legality of the assessment orders. The Tribunal dismissed the application, emphasizing that the issue of DIN was still under litigation and had not reached finality.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793352 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Rajesh Chaudhary in ITA No.1615 & 1616/Del/2021, CIT vs. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., South Coast Spices Exports (P) Ltd. v. PCIT, Chandra Bhan vs UOI, Prakash Lal Khandelwal Vs
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHIB P. SATSANGI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation; Assessment record; Time period of passing order; Revision of order; Procedural lapse
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘DB’ : AGRA. BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.2/AGR/2024 (in ITA No.88/AGR/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) PCIT 1, vs. Amit Kumar Gupta, Agra. Mohalla Vaidan Tola, G.T. Road, Kurawali, Mainpuri – 205 265 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AHZPG2778B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date of Order : 26 .09.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This misc. application is filed by the Applicant/Assessee against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.88/AGR/2022 dated 10.11.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18 for recalling the impugned order dated 10.11.2023. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. DR of the Revenue reiterated the submissions made in the misc. application which are reproduced below for the sake of brevity :- Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA No.2/AGR/2025 “In this regard, it is submitted that aggrieved with the order u/s 263 of the Act, 1961 passed on 31.03.2022 by the CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-l, Agra, the assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra. The Hon ble ITAT, Agra Bench \"DB\", Agra vide order dated 10.11.2023 has allowed the appeal of the assessee declaring the order u/s 263 dated 31.03.2022 as non-est holding that in absence of any. material change in the factual matrix, legal proposition and in the circular no.19 of the CBDT, the assessment orders have to be declared non-est and deemed to have never been issued. The Hon’ble ITAT has also given liberty to file Miscellaneous Application in the case revenue could undisputedly prove that the DIN was mentioned in the Assessment Order or generated and communicated to the assessee as per the prerequisite mentioned in the Circular. In this regard, it is submitted that - A. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act at the total income of Rs.6,13,240/- on 19.12.2019. Thereafter, on examination of assessment records, various discrepancies were noticed by the CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-1, Agra and therefore, proceedings u/s. 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 were initiated. B. The order u/s.263 of the Act was passed on 31.03.2022 by the CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-1, Agra holding that after careful consideration of the material available on record, the order passed by the AO is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and therefore, assessment order passed u/s.143(3) dated 19.12.2019 was cancelled with the direction r«. AO to pass fresh order, denovo, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. C. Aggrieved with the order u/s.263 of the Act dated 31.03.2022 passed by the CCIT(OSD)/PCIT-1, Agra, the assessee had filed appeal before Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra. D. Meanwhile, pursuant to the order u/s.263 of the Act, the AO completed the assessment u/s.143(3)/263 of the Act on 27.03.2023 at the Income of Rs.35,13,240/- after making an addition of Rs.30,00,000/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961. E. The Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench \"DB\", Agra vide above order dated 10.11.2023 in ITA No. 88/ AGR/2022 has allowed the appeal of the assessee declaring the order u/s 263 dated 31.03.2022 as non-est holding that in absence of any material change in the factual matrix, legal proposition and in the circular no.19 of the CBDT, the assessment orders have to be declared non-est and deemed to have never been issued. Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA No.2/AGR/2025 F. It is submitted that from the perusal of Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench \"DB\", Agra, it is observed that the Hon'ble ITAT in the above order dated 10.11.2023 has given the finding as under: \"Having gone through the factual matrix before, we are of the considered view that the orders have to be quashed. The Ld. DR has succeeded in pursuing the bench to give liberty file Miscellaneous Application in case the revenue could undisputedly prove that the DIN was mentioned in the Assessment Order or generated and communicated to the assessee as per t 'le prerequisites mentioned in the circular. In the absence of any material change in the factual matrix, I legal proposition and in the circular no. 19 of the CBDT, we hereby hold that the Assessment Order have to be declared as non-est and deemed to have never been issued.\" G. The Hon'ble ITAT, in their above order has referred to the order dated 18.10.2023 delivered by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Rajesh Chaudhary in ITA No.1615 & 1616/Del/2021 and Co Nos. 151, 152/Del/2022 in which the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Bench referred the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. 2023 (4) TMI 579 dated 20.03.2023. H. Para-2 of the CBDT Circular no. 19/2019 dated 14th August, 2 19 stated that; \"In order to prevent such instances and to maintain proper audit trail of all communication, the Board in exercise of power under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (here in after referred to as \"the Act\"), has decided 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 or any other person, on or after the lst day of October, 2019 unless a computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) has been allotted and is duly quoted in the body of such communication. \" Considering the above facts, it is submitted that - (i) In this case, the DIN was duly generated and communicated to the assessee as per prerequisite mentioned in the subject CBDT circular. The DIN generated by the Ld. PCIT-l, Agra for order u/s.263 dated 31.03.2022 is ITBA/REV /M/REV5/2021-22/ 1042336463(1). In this regard an intimation letter dated 31.03.2022 bearing Dr' ITBA/REV/S/91/2021-22/ 1042336552(1) was generated vide which i was communicated to the assessee that the subjected order u/s.263 Printed from counselvise.com 4 MA No.2/AGR/2025 dated 31.08.2022 is having Document no. (DIN) ITBA/REV/M/ REV5/202 22/10423316463(1). The same was duly attached with the Order u/s. 263 dated 3l.03.2022. Hence, it is proven fact that the questioned DIN was duly generated during the proceedings and subsequently communicated to the assessee. Copy of the same is attached herewith for kind perusal and consideration. (ii) Further, in an appeal filed by the Income Tax Department against ruling by the Hon 'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Brandix Mauritius Holdings on 20.03.2023, the Hon'ble Supreme Court issued an interim stay through the division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih stating that not mentioning DIN in assessment orders may be an 'irregularity but that does not make it an 'illegality'. Not mentioning DIN can be a procedural irregularity, but it cannot be a basis for quashing the assessment order in itself. (iii) Further, Hon'ble Kerala High Court in case of South Coast Spices Exports (P) Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 93 (Ker.)] held that assessment order cannot be challenged on ground that satisfaction notes supplied to assessee did not bear DIN number; \"Pursuant to search conducted at premises of one KN, documents were seized and sworn statement were recorded wherein it was noted that KN was trying to buy land from assessee for which certain sum was paid by cheque and balance in cash. Assessing Officer based or said observation held that there was escapement of income in hands of assessee as said transaction was not accounted for by assessee. Assessing Officer after recording satisfaction, issued notice under section 153C. Thereafter, assessment orders were passed. In instant writ assessee challenged impugned orders on ground that satisfaction notes supplied to assessee did not bear DIN number. Satisfaction note was document prepared by Assessing Officer which was kept in file and unless demanded by assessee it was not required to be provided to assessee. Since when satisfaction notes were provided to assessee, said communication bore DIN, impugned notices and assessment orders were not without jurisdiction.\" (iv) The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court Allahabad in case of Chandra Bhan vs UOI order dated 18.07.2023 vide Writ tax 829/2023 neutral citation 2023 \"AHC: 142867-DB\" has not entertained the WP of the assessee and hence rejected by mentioning that; \"The main argument is that the order is without jurisdiction since notices were not issued on DIN. This argument is noticed only to be rejected since no prejudice is shown to have been caused to the petitioner on account of issuance of manual notices. Admittedly, the petitioner has acknowledged receipt of such notice and has also submitted his objections, which have been duly adverted to. Non- Printed from counselvise.com 5 MA No.2/AGR/2025 issuance of notice on DIN would thus not be a ground to entertain the writ petition, notwithstanding the availability of alternative remedy.\" (v) In the case of Prakash Lal Khandelwal Vs (TT [TS-143-HC- 2023(JHAR)] wherein issue involves was whether a delay in uploading assessment order / generating a DIN renders the order invalid, the Hon'bJe Jharkhand High Court vide order dated 2l.02.2023 emphasized that there is no restriction or prescribed limitation period for the issue of the order, uploading it on the web portal, or its communication. The court referred to the provision in Section 263 and Supreme Court judgment holding that the making of the order is distinct from its receipt or communication. The court concluded that the delay of only one day in uploading the order or generating the DIN does not render the assessment order unsustainable in law. (vi) The appeal filed by the assessee before the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Diary No/A0917/2023, case No.SLP(C) No.026363/2023) against the above order of the Hon 'ble Jharkhand High Court is still pending and the tentative next date of hearing, as per Supreme Court Site, is 24.09.2024. In view of the above facts and the directions given in the Hon 'ble ITAT order dated 10.1l.2023, revenue is availing the liberty to file the Misc. Application in this matter so the issues of the case might be decided on the merits. From the above position of facts, it is submitted that certain infirmities may have crept in the order dated 10.1l.2023 passed by the Hon 'ble ITAT, Agra Bench Agra while deciding the ITA No.88 / AGR/2022 contrary to the facts of the case apparent from record. The Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- I, Agra had passed the order u/s 263 dated 31.03.2022 with DIN- ITBA/REV /S/91/2021-22/1042336552(1) which is evident from the facts as mentioned above. In the light of the above, it is respectfully being submitted that the Hon ble ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra may kindly be pleased to allow present application and review / recall its order dated 10.11.2023 passed in ITA No.88/ AGR/2022 and pass a fresh order by deciding the issue on merit. 3. On the other hand, ld. AR of the assessee objected to the above submissions and submitted that there is no mistake apparent on record and the Department has only requested to review the order which is not permissible, therefore, the MA should not be entertained. 4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the Department filed this misc. application with the pleading that the Printed from counselvise.com 6 MA No.2/AGR/2025 coordinate Bench has given liberty to the Revenue to file misc. application in case, they are able to prove undisputedly that the ‘DIN’ was mentioned in the assessment order or generated and communicated to the assessee as per prerequisites mentioned in the Circular. However, in the misc. application filed by the Revenue, it claims that the ld. PCIT has generated ‘DIN’ as per requirement and communicated to the assessee. However, we observed that the liberty was granted to the Revenue to prove the service of ‘DIN’ for the completion of assessment order not for revision proceedings. From the record, it is not prove that the ‘DIN’ was generated by the Assessing Officer for the original assessment, generation of ‘DIN’ for revision proceedings has implication on the assessment proceedings being bad in law. The issue of ‘DIN’ has not reached finality, still under litigation. 5. Therefore, we are inclined to dismiss the misc. application filed by the Revenue as the original assessment passed by the Assessing Officer without ‘DIN’, will not be cured by the subsequent proceedings. Therefore, misc. application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 6. In the result, the misc. application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 26 day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26.09.2025/TS Printed from counselvise.com 7 MA No.2/AGR/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "