Shri Subhash Chand, Muzaffarnagar V. ACIT, Central Circle, Panaji

ITSSA 10/PAN/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Subhash Chand against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji, which were based on an assessment order for the year 2014-15. The primary legal issue was the validity of the order due to the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN), which is a mandatory requirement for all communications related to assessments, appeals, and orders as per CBDT Circular 19/2019. The Tribunal, after noting the procedural irregularity, decided that the order was non-est (not in existence) due to the lack of DIN and thus could not be upheld.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136147 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 06-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 21-11-2019
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd., K.P. Varghese Vs ITO, Ernakulum, Back Office IT Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 250

Judgement Text

॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी में ॥ ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing at Pune) आयकरअपील सं. / IT(SS)A No’s.10/PAN/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2014-15 Shri Subhash Chand, 830, South Civil Line, Muzhaffarnagar, Uttarpradesh – 251001, PAN: ABHPC4386K .......अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. .......प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri B. Y. Chavan सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; The assessee filed present appeal against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji dt. 04/10/2019 passed u/s 250 of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] which emanated out of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act for assessment year [for short ‘AY’] 2014-15. Shri Subhash Chand IT(SS)A No’s.10/PAN/2019 AY : 2014-15 ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 2. During the course of physical hearing, in the absence of assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR we proceeded to dispose of the present appeal ex-parte u/r 24 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 [‘ITAT-Rules’ hereinafter]. Subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT- Rules, perused material placed on record, and duly considered facts of the case in the light of settled legal position which are forewarned to parties present. 3. In so far as the maintainability of present appeal is concerned, it is noted that, the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 04/10/2019 and communicated to assessee does bear neither Document Identification Number [for short ‘DIN’] nor find annexed any documentary evidence to showcase post compliance of DIN requirement in terms of CBDT Circular 19/2019 dt. 14/08/2019. 4. Admittedly, impugned order was communicated by the Ld. CIT(A) after 01/10/2019 have suffered from compliance in terms of CBDT Circular (supra), for the reason neither any appeal against such non-est order is maintainable nor Shri Subhash Chand IT(SS)A No’s.10/PAN/2019 AY : 2014-15 ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 4 any adjudication can be founded on such non-est communication. In holding so, the bench noted that, while vouching effect of non-generation vis-à-vis non-quoting of DIN, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court while dealing with similar issue in ‘CIT Vs Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd.’ (163/2023 dt. 20/03/2023), has held that the communication in relation to assessments, appeals, orders etc., which finds mention in paragraph 2 of the 2019 circular, albeit without DIN, can have no standing in law, having regard to the provisions of paragraph 4 of the 2019 circular. Their lordships have also observed that in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘K.P. Varghese Vs ITO, Ernakulum (1981) 4 SCC 173 and in the case of ‘Back Office IT Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI (2021) SCC online Del 2742, the circulars issued by CBDT binds the Revenue in administration or implementation of law, and such circulars cannot be side- stepped causing prejudice by bringing to naught the object for which such circulars are issued. 5. In the light of aforestated legal position, in the extant case, undisputedly impugned order was communicated in violation of Para-2 of CBDT Circular (supra) and no material Shri Subhash Chand IT(SS)A No’s.10/PAN/2019 AY : 2014-15 ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 4 showcasing post compliance in terms of Para 3 & 5 are laid before us. For the want of DIN, impugned order suffered from compliance hence rendered itself invalid as if never been issued, therefore gives rise to no cause for action to either party. 6. In these circumstances, in our considered view, the impugned order is to be treated as never been issued to the assessee and therefore ceases to have any effect in the eyes of law. 7. In result, appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED. U/r 34 of ITAT Rules, the order is pronounced in open court on this FRIDAY 01 st day of September, 2023. -S/d- -S/d- S. S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ PUNE ; नििधंक / Dated : 01 st day of September, 2023. आदेशकीप्रधिधलधपअग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलधर्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Panaji-Goa 4. The Pr. CIT, Panaji 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench 6.गधर्ाफ़धइल / Guard File. SGR* आिेशधिुसधर / By Order, वऩरष्ठनिजीसनिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयन्यधयधनर्करण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.