PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. M/S BILASA AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 277 / 2024HC Delhi13 May 20242 pages
For Petitioner: SANJAY KUMAR
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court admitted the appeal for consideration on specific questions of law. The court is examining whether the ITAT was correct in quashing the assessment order based on the absence of DIN and ignoring the AO's approval for manual orders and timely uploading.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that quashed an assessment order. The ITAT accepted the assessee's grounds that the assessment order was passed manually without a Document Identification Number (DIN). The Revenue argued that the Assessing Officer had obtained approval for manual orders and that the order was uploaded within the stipulated time with a DIN generated.

What were the issues?

The key issues revolve around the validity of a manually passed assessment order without a DIN, and whether the ITAT correctly quashed it despite the AO obtaining approval and complying with procedural timelines for uploading.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified in the provided text

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~81 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 277/2024

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2

..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar & Ms. Easha, Advs.

versus

M/S BILASA AND SONS PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Kapil Goel & Mr. Sandeep Goel, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR

KAURAV

13.05.2024 O R D E R

1.

Notice. Since the respondent is duly represented by Mr. Goel, no further steps need be taken. We take note of identical questions which are engaging our attention in ITA 263/2024. We also bear in consideration the interim order passed by the Supreme Court dated 03 January 2024 in respect of the judgment handed down by this Court in CIT v. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd. [2023 SCC OnLine Del 6481]. Matter requires consideration. 2. We, consequently, admit the instant appeal on the following questions of law:- A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’] is correct in quashing the assessment order by accepting the assessee’s additional grounds that the assessment order was passed manually without Document Identification This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:44:20

Number [‘DIN’] and that the same amounts to invalidity, ignoring the fact that the Assessing Officer [‘AO’] had obtained approval of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax [‘CCIT’] (Central), New Delhi for passing of manual orders? B. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT is correct in ignoring the fact that as per the Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14 August 2019, the assessment order was uploaded on the Income Tax Business Application [‘ITBA’] on 19 January 2020 within 15 working days and DIN was duly generated? 3. List again on 31.08.2024.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. MAY 13, 2024/RW This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:44:20

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →