WATANMAL BOOLCHAND & COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI V. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

ITTPA 66/CHNY/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Watanmal Boolchand & Company Ltd, which contested the assessment orders issued for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Chennai. The primary legal issue was the validity of the assessment orders, which were based on a draft assessment order and DRP directions that did not contain a mandatory DIN. The Tribunal considered the legal implications of the absence of DIN in light of the CBDT Circular No.19/2019, which mandates that all communications from the Income Tax Department must include a DIN to ensure proper audit trails and transparency.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780003 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Chandrabhan Vs Union of India, Prakashlal Kandelval, Brandix Mauritius Holdings, Ekambaram Elumalai, Sutherland Globe Services Inc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARV SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T. BANUSEKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Transfer pricing
• Section: 148; 144; 143(3); 131; 133A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.64/Chny/2023, Assessment Years: 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.65/Chny/2023, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.66/Chny/2023, Assessment Years: 2015-16 Watanmal Boolchand & Company Ltd, C/o.CRBS & Associates LLP, Chartered Accounts, No.37, 2nd Street, Alagiri Nagar, Vadapalani, Chennai-600 026. [PAN: AABCW3559Q] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-2(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.T.Banusekar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.ARV Sreenivasan, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10.10.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : The below mentioned appeals have been filed by the appellant assessee for AY-2013-14 to 2015-16 contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority indicated Column-E, herein below:- S. No. Appeal Nos. AYs Appellant CIT(A) Order Details Respondent A B C D E F 1 IT(TP)A No.64 / Chny / 2023 2013-14 Watanmal Boolchand & Company Ltd, C/o.CRBS & Associates LLP, DIN & Order No.ITBA / AST / S / 91 / 2023-24 / 1053963276(1) dated 22.06.2023 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 2 - of 16 2 IT(TP)A No.65 / Chny / 2023, 2014-15 Chartered Accounts, No.37, 2nd Street, Alagiri Nagar, Vadapalani, Chennai-600 026. [PAN: AABCW3559Q] DIN & Order No.ITBA / AST / S / 91 / 2023-24 / 1053963231(1) dated 22.06.2023 International Taxation, Circle-2(2), Chennai 3 IT(TP)A No.66 / Chny / 2023, 2015-16 DIN & Order No.ITBA / AST / S / 91 / 2023-24 / 1054425272(1) dated 07.07.2023 2.0 All the above appeals of the assessee are centering around a common issue and hence were heard together and are being adjudicated by this common order. The facts of all the three cases have been stated to be identical in all the appeals and rival parties have agreed on the issue. For the purposes of this common order, facts and figures for AY- 2013-14 qua IT(TP)A No.64 / Chny / 2023 shall be considered as lead year. The decision taken in IT(TP)A No.64 / Chny / 2023 shall apply mutatis mutandis in IT(TP)A No.65-66 / Chny / 2023. 3.0 At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 22.06.2023 is infructuous and bad in law and deserves to be quashed. The Ld.Counsel assailed through the grounds of appeal including additional grounds of appeal the impugned order on legal grounds and merits of addition. The Ld.Counsel invited our attention to ground of appeal nos 2 & 3 whereby a challenge has been raised to the validity of draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 31.12.2019 and of directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) dated 29.05.2023 respectively. The Ld.Counsel submitted that the Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 3 - of 16 impugned orders dated 31.12.2019 and dated 29.05.2023 do not contain the mandatory DIN Number. It has been argued that the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 22.06.2023 is wholly resting on the above mentioned draft assessment order and the directions of the DRP. It was argued that and since the two orders have fallen under the mischief of non-quoting of DIN number, the said assessment order dated 22.06.2023 would not survive as a valid order. In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel has filed a voluminous paper book, inter- alia, containing copies of various orders, pertaining to AY-2013-14 to AY- 2015-16, issued by Revenue authorities, Circulars No.19 / 2019 dated 14.08.2019 issued by Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes as well as judicial precents governing the matter. It was accordingly, requested that the assessment order dated 22.06.2023 be declared as null and void and quashed. 4.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR placed reliance upon the decisions of lower authorities. It was vehemently argued that both the draft assessment order dated 31.12.2019 and the DRP directions dated 29.05.2023 were followed with covering letters dated 27.10.2022 and 29.05.2023 respectively. It was accordingly argued that consequently no assumption qua non-availability of DIN number can be drawn in this case. It was argued that the assessee is raising hyper technical issues to get relief. Reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 4 - of 16 Allahabad High Court in the case of Chandrabhan Vs Union of India and of Jharkhand High Court in the case of Prakashlal Kandelval. It was further argued that Hon’ble Apex Court has in the case of Brandix Mauritius Holdings stayed an order of Delhi High Court on similar facts. 5.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The issuance of draft assessment order and the directions of the DRP are governed by the provisions of 144C of the Act and hence we deem it appropriate to reproduce the same hereunder:- “…..[Reference to dispute resolution panel. 61 144C. (1) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything to the con- trary contained in this Act, in the first instance, forward 62 a draft of the proposed order of assessment (hereafter in this section referred to as the draft order) to the eligible assessee if he proposes to make, on or after the 1st day of October, 2009, any variation 63[***] which is prejudicial to the interest of such assessee. (2) On receipt of the draft order, the eligible assessee shall, within thirty days of the receipt by him of the draft order,- (a) file his acceptance of the variations to the Assessing Officer; or (b) file his objections, if any, to such variation with,- (i) the Dispute Resolution Panel; and (ii) the Assessing Officer. (3) The Assessing Officer shall complete the assessment on the basis of the draft order, if- (a) the assessee intimates to the Assessing Officer the acceptance of the variation; or (b) no objections are received within the period specified in sub-section (2). (4) The Assessing Officer shall, notwithstanding anything contained in section 15364[or section 153B], pass the assessment order under sub-section (3) within one month from the end of the month in which,- Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 5 - of 16 (a) the acceptance is received; or (b) the period of filing of objections under sub-section (2) expires. (5) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall, in a case where any objection is received under sub-section (2), issue such directions, as it thinks fit, for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment. (6) The Dispute Resolution Panel shall issue the directions referred to in sub-section (5), after considering the following, namely:- (a) draft order; (b) objections filed by the assessee; (c) evidence furnished by the assessee; (d) report, if any, of the Assessing Officer, Valuation Officer or Transfer Pricing Officer or any other authority; (e) records relating to the draft order; (f) evidence collected by, or caused to be collected by, it; and (g) result of any enquiry made by, or caused to be made by, it. (7) The Dispute Resolution Panel may, before issuing any directions referred to in sub-section (5),- (a) make such further enquiry, as it thinks fit; or (b) cause any further enquiry to be made by any income-tax authority and report the result of the same to it. (8) The Dispute Resolution Panel may confirm, reduce or enhance the variations proposed in the draft order so, however, that it shall not set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under sub-section (5) for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. 65[Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the power of the Dispute Resolution Panel to enhance the variation shall include and shall be deemed always to have included the power to consider any matter arising out of the assessment proceedings relating to the draft order, notwithstanding that such matter was raised or not by the eligible assessee.] (9) If the members of the Dispute Resolution Panel differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. (10) Every direction issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel shall be binding on the Assessing Officer. Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 6 - of 16 (11) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of the assessee or the interest of the revenue, respectively. (12) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued after nine months from the end of the month in which the draft order is forwarded to the eligible assessee. (13) Upon receipt of the directions issued under sub-section (5), the Assessing Officer shall, in conformity with the directions, complete, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 15366[or section 153B], the assessment without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee, within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. (14) The Board may make rules 67 for the purposes of the efficient functioning of the Dispute Resolution Panel and expeditious disposal of the objections filed under sub- section (2) by the eligible assessee. 68[(14A) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any assessment or reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the 69[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of section 144BA.] 70[(14B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of issuance of directions by the dispute resolution panel, so as to impart greater efficiency, transparency and accountability by- (a) eliminating the interface between the dispute resolution panel and the eligible assessee or any other person to the extent technologically feasible; (b) optimising utilisation of the resources through economies of scale and functional specialisation; (c) introducing a mechanism with dynamic jurisdiction for issuance of directions by dispute resolution panel. (14C) The Central Government may, for the purpose of giving effect to the scheme made under sub-section (14B), by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that any of the provisions of this Act shall not apply or shall apply with such exceptions, modifications and adaptations as may be specified in the notification. 71 [***] Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 7 - of 16 (14D) Every notification issued under sub-section (14B) and sub-section (14C) shall, as soon as may be after the notification is issued, be laid before each House of Parliament.] (15) For the purposes of this section,- (a) “Dispute Resolution Panel” means a collegium comprising of three 69[Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners of Income-tax constituted by the Board for this purpose; (b) “eligible assessee” means,- (i) any person in whose case the variation referred to in sub-section (1) arises as a consequence of the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer passed under sub-section (3) of section 92CA; and 72[(ii) any non-resident not being a company, or any foreign company:]] 73[Provided that such eligible assessee shall not include person referred to in sub- section (1) of section 158BA or other person referred to in section 158BD.] 73[(16) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any proceedings under Chapter XIV-B.]….” 6.0 Further, the CBDT Circular No.19 / 2019 dated 14.08.2019 stipulated as under:- “…..CIRCULAR NO. 19/ 2019 [F.NO. 225/95/2019-ITA.II] SECTION 119 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES - INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBORDINATE AUTHORITIES - GENERATION/ALLOTMENT/QUOTING OF DOCUMENTS IDENTIFICATION NUMBER IN NOTICE/ORDER/SUMMONS/LETTER/CORRESPONDENCE ISSUED BY THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR NO. 19/ 2019 [F.NO. 225/95/2019-ITA.II], DATED 14-8-2019 With the launch of various e-governance initiatives, Income-tax Department is moving toward total computerization of its work. This has led to a significant improvement in delivery of services and has also brought greater transparency in the functioning of the tax-administration. Presently, almost all notices and orders are being generated electronically on the Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) platform. However, it Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 8 - of 16 has been brought to the notice of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (the Board) that there have been some instances in which the notice, order, summons, letter and any correspondence (hereinafter referred to as \"communication\") were found to have been issued manually, without maintaining a proper audit trail of such communication. 2. 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 (hereinafter 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 1st 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. 3. In exceptional circumstances such as, — (i) when there are technical difficulties in generating/allotting/quoting the DIN and issuance of communication electronically; or (ii) when communication regarding enquiry, verification etc. is required to be issued by an income-tax authority, who is outside the office, for discharging his official duties: or (iii) when due to delay in PAN migration. PAN is lying with non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer; or (iv) when PAN of assessee is not available and where a proceeding under the Act (other than verification under section 131 or section 133 of the Act) is sought to be initiated; or (v) When the functionality to issue communication is not available in the system, the communication may be issued manually but only after recording reasons in writing in the file and with prior written approval of the Chief Commissioner/Director General of income-tax. In cases where manual communication is required to be issued due to delay in PAN migration, the proposal seeking approval for issuance of manual communication shall include the reason for delay in PAN migration. The communication issued under aforesaid circumstances shall state the fact that the communication is issued manually without a DIN and the date of obtaining of the Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 9 - of 16 written approval of the Chief Commissioner/ Director General of Income-tax for issue of manual communication in the following format- \" .. This communication issues manually without a DIN on account of reason/reasons given in para3(i)/3(ii)/3(iii)/3(iv)/3(v) of the CBDT Circular No ...dated (strike off those which are not applicable) and with the approval of the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income Tax vide number .... dated .... 4. Any communication which is not in conformity with Para-2 and Para-3 above, shall be treated as invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued. 5. The communication issued manually in the three situations specified in para 3- (i), (ii) or (iii) above shall have to be regularised within 15 working days of its issuance, by — i. uploading the manual communication on the System. ii. compulsorily generating the DIN on the System; iii. communicating the DIN so generated to the assessee/any other person as per electronically generated pro-forma available on the System. 6. An intimation of issuance of manual communication for the reasons mentioned in para 3(v) shall be sent to the Principal Director General of Income-tax (Systems) within seven days from the dale of its issuance. 7. Further, in all pending assessment proceedings, where notices were issued manually, prior to issuance of this Circular, the Income-tax authorities shall identify such cases and shall upload the notices in these cases on the Systems by 31th October, 2019….” 7.0 It is pertinent to briefly recapitulate the brief factual matrix of the case as recorded by the Ld.AO in his order dated 22.06.2023. The assessee company namely Watanmal India Pvt Ltd(WIPL) has been engaged in the business activity as a general merchandise trading company having various divisions like culinary, spices, rice, oil, beverages’ and confectionary etc. A survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 14.03.2013 at the business premise of WIPL leading to Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 10 - of 16 discovery of various incriminating material. Notice u/s 148 for AY-2013- 14 dated 28.03.2018 was issued with the approval of CIT International Taxation Chennai. The appellant assessee had moved Hon’ble High Court by way of Writ Petition No.WP20254, 20255 of 2016 seeking quashing of proceedings. The Hon’ble High Court had in its interim order dated 16.06.2016 had then allowed the Revenue to proceed with assessment subject to the consequent order kept in sealed cover till decision of Hon’ble High Court. Subsequently a final order was passed and Revenue proceeded to pass order u/s 143(3) dated 22.06.2023. The Ld.AO forwarded a draft assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 31.12.2019 to the assessee. The assessee chose to approach the DRP which issued its directions dated 29.05.2023. After considering the directions of the DRP, the Ld.AO proceeded to pass the impugned final order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 22.06.2023. 8.0 It is the case of the appellant assessee that the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 147 dated 22.06.2023 which is wholly resting on the above mentioned draft assessment order and the directions of the DRP is invalid and deserves to be quashed. It has been argued by the assessee that sub-section(1) and sub-section(5) r.w.s.(10) of section 144C extracted hereinabove make the act of passing a draft assessment order by the Ld.AO and issuance of directions by the DRP a statutory mandatory action. Thus, provisions of section 144C(1) and (10) are statutory requirements and cannot be brushed aside. It has been further Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 11 - of 16 argued that it is trite law that circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT have a binding effect upon the assessing authorities. It has been submitted that CBDT in terms of its circular No.19 of 2019 dated 14.08.2019 has, in the light of promotion and furtherance of e-governance initiatives of the government, while exercising its powers u/s 119 of the Act, mandated that no communication shall be issued by an 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 1st 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….”. It has been mandated in para 4 of the impugned circular that any communication not in conformity with para 2 and 3 (i.e. one not having a DIN number and not saved by the exception clauses) shall be treated as invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued. 9.0 We have noted that there exists sufficient force in the argument of the assessee that non-quoting of DIN number in the impugned draft assessment order and the DRP directions have become fatal to the ultimate order u/s 143(3) dated 22/6/2023. It has been held in a catena of cases that circular and instructions issued by CBDT are not having mere persuasive value but they carry a clear authority of law and hence are binding upon Income Tax Authorities. Consequently, in the instant case non-quoting of DIN number in the impugned draft assessment order (DFA) and the DRP directions have become fatal causing irreparable damage to the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 22/6/2023. The additions made in the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 22/6/2023 are resting upon DFA and DRPs recommendations therefore cannot survive. Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 12 - of 16 10.0 We have noted that a Coordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ekambaram Elumalai in ITA NO.1799 OF 2025 dated 03.09.2025 have held that quoting of DIN on all orders are compulsory and mandatory and its unavailability will be fatal to the orders per se. “…..3.2 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is an admitted fact on records that the notice u/s. 148 dated 30.07.2022, upon which the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 dated 21.03.2023 is resting, was issued without quoting any DIN number. It is also undisputed fact on records that w.r.t CBDT Circular No.19 / 2019 dated 14.08.2019 , any communication issued by Revenue without DIN number shall be invalid and non-est. The argument of Revenue regarding the additional communication dated 30/7/22 suggesting that the notice u/s 148 shall be deemed to have DIN No.ITBA / AST / M / 148_1 / 2022-23 / 1044351961(1) is inconsequential. Law mandates quoting of DIN number on document per se. Subsequent, clarificatory communications cannot rescue the Revenue. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that in the absence of a DIN number upon notice u/s 148 dated 30/07/2022, the same becomes invalid, non est and hence infructuous. It is also trite law that when the foundation (in this case notice u/s 148 ) goes, the super structure (in this case assessment order u/s 147 dated 21.03.2023) would also collapses. Thus, the legal ground raised by the assessee qua non- availability of DIN number upon notice u/s 148 dated 30/07/2022 stands allowed. 11.0 We have further noted that Hon’ble Madras High Court has examined the issue of mandatory quoting of DIN number by Revenue authorities in the case of Sutherland Globe Services Inc dated 10.06.2025 as at 175 taxmann.com 897. Thus, Hon’ble Court has held Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 13 - of 16 that quoting of DIN is mandatory exercise and any order without the same would not survive. “….20. Thus, according to appellant, a DIN in fact was generated for DRP proceedings, written by hand and subsequently communicated on 21.12.2022 and therefore, the conditions prescribed in paragraph No.3 of the circular have been complied with. Admittedly, the reason for writing the DIN number by hand and the reason for not generating the DIN electronically have not been specified in the format prescribed in paragraph No.3 of the circular. Even prior written approval of the Chief Commissioner/Director General of Income-Tax, as prescribed in Clause (3) of the Circular, was not brought to our notice. If such prior permission has not been taken, that will also be another ground to make the communication to be treated as invalid and having never been issued. Therefore, the communication or the proceedings of the DRP, is not in conformity with paragraph Nos.2 and 3 of the circular and are invalid and deemed to have never been issued. Consequently, the assessment orders under Section 144C(13) of the Act, which are passed on those directions of DRP, cannot be sustainable. Therefore, the findings of ITAT are in accordance with law and no interference is called for. The substantial questions of law are answered accordingly….” 12.0 We do not find any force in the argument of the Ld.DR that as Hon’ble Apex Court has , in the case of Brandix Mauritius Holdings Limited, stayed the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court on the issue of non-quoting of DIN number, no reliance can be placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court. The averments of the Revenue cannot be accepted as it has not brought on record any evidence to suggest that operation of the impugned decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sutherland Globe Services Inc has been stayed. The other Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 14 - of 16 decisions relied by Revenue have been considered and found to be distinguished. Judicial discipline further postulate that decisions of Jurisdictional High Court have binding precedence on all quasi-judicial authorities under its territory judisdiction. 13.0 We have also noted that there is no force in the argument of the Revenue that the impugned DFA and DRP directions are saved since they were accompanied with a covering letters which bore a DIN number. There is no dispute that the impugned DFA and the DRP directions are governed by the statutory prescription and the authority given in section 144C(1) and 144C(5) r.w. 144C(10). It is also not the case of revenue that its case of non quoting DIN numbers on DFA and DRP directions are covered by any of the exceptions contained in impugned circular number 19/2019 supra. Thus, the impugned DFA and the DRP directions assume the character and authority of an order referred in para 2 of the circular no.19 of 2019. It is trite law that if the prescription of law is unambiguously clear, no different interpretation can be taken. As per the contemporaneous law, quoting of DIN Number was mandatory upon the DFA and the DRP directions which are “orders” within the meaning of section 144C(1) and 144C(5) r.w. 144C(10) respectively. As per circular No.19/2019, each communication issued by a taxman to the taxpayer must contain a DIN number. In the instant case, both covering letters and enclosed DFA order and DRP directions Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 15 - of 16 are separate communications and hence both ought to have separate DIN numbers. Therefore, non-availability of DIN number on the same has made the impugned DFA and the DRP directions invalid within the meanings of para 4 of circular no.19 supra. We are of the considered view that as the impugned DFA and the DRP directions have become invalid, corresponding assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 22.06.2023 would have also not survive. Accordingly, in respectfull compliance to the orders of Hon‘ble Madras High Court and for the purposes of consistency qua order of this tribunal in the case of Ekambaram Elumalai supra, we hereby set aside and quash the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 22.06.2023. Accordingly, the ground of appeal no.2 and 3 raised by the appellant assessee are therefore allowed. 14.0 As the assessee has succeeded qua its legal grounds of appeal no.2 and 3 above, all the other legal grounds and those raised qua merits of the addition have become academic in nature. 15.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No.64 / Chny / 2023 for AY-2013-14 stands allowed. 16.0 As stated above the rival parties have conceded that the facts of the case for all the years are identical. Consequently, the decision taken herein above in IT(TP)A No.64 / Chny / 2023 for AY-2013-14 shall apply mutatis mutandis in ITA No.65 / Chny / 2023 for AY-2014-15 and ITA No.66 / Chny / 2023 for AY-2015-16 respectively. Accordingly, the Printed from counselvise.com IT(TP)A No.64, 65 & 66 /Chny/2023 Page - 16 - of 16 appeals of the assessee for ITA No.65 and 66 supra are also stands allowed. 17.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee are decided as under:- ITA Nos Assessment Year Result IT(TP)A No.64 / Chny / 2023, 2013-14 Allowed IT(TP)A No.65 / Chny / 2023, 2014-15 Allowed IT(TP)A No.66 / Chny / 2023, 2015-16 Allowed Order pronounced on 10th , October -2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (एबी टी. वर्की) (ABY T VARKEY) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 10th , October - 2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF Printed from counselvise.com "