Revision Order without DIN is Invalid: ITAT [Read Order]

Revision - Order - DIN - ITAT - TAXSCAN

Without a Director Identification Number (DIN), a revision order is invalid, according to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Bangalore bench of George George K. (a judicial member) and Padmavathy S. (an accountant member).

The appeal was against the order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT).

The assessee, an individual is a contractor earning business income from contract receipts apart from rental income and interest income and filed return of income Rs. 2,58,15,614 for the A.Y. 2011-12.

The case was selected for scrutiny under Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act by making disallowance of agricultural income of Rs.5,00,000 and disallowance of expenses with respect to machinery maintenance of Rs.4,50,000.

Hemant Pai, the representative of assessee, argued that if the extra ground is accepted and the legal question of DIN not being available on the revision order is decided, the arguments made in the main ground will no longer be relevant.

The tribunal observed that in the appeal of the assessee, it is noticed as per the appeal set filed, that the revision order sent on 15.03.2021  does not contain the DIN.

The department representative argued that the intimation dated 15.03.2021 is part of the order and that there is no violation cannot be accepted as generating the DIN by separate intimation is allowed to be done to regularise the manual order (Para 5 of the circular) provided the manual order is issued in accordance with the procedure as contained in Para 3.

The authority noted that it is obvious that neither the section 263 of the Income Tax Act order nor the specific format specified in Paragraph 3 states that the communication is issued manually without a DIN after receiving the required approvals. As a result, they conclude that the challenged order does not conform with paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) circular.

The bench upheld the case of Dilip Kothari and concluded that the order passed was invalid as per the CBDT circular.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.

taxscan-loader