IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.06.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN T.C.A.Nos.80, 81 and 82 of 2025 and CMP Nos.9729, 9735, 9734, 9736 and 9739 of 2025 Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Chennai – 600 034. … Appellant in all cases Vs Sutherland Global Services Inc., C/o. Dhruva Advisors LLP, Prestige Terraces, 2nd Floor, Union Street, Infantry Road, Bengaluru -

001.

(PAN: AAOCS 1555P) … Respondent in all cases Prayer: Appeals filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the common order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Chennai, dated 22.12.2023 passed in IT (TP) A.No.29/CHNY/2023, IT (TP) A.No.30/CHNY/2023 and IT (TP) A.No.27/CHNY/2023, for the assessment years i.e., 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2013-14, respectively.

For Appellant : Mr.Karthik Ranganathan in all cases Sr. Standing Counsel For Respondent : Mr.N.V.Balaji in all cases COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by SUNDER MOHAN, J)

By consent, the captioned Tax Case Appeals are taken up for final hearing and disposed of at the admission stage itself.

2. Respondent/assessee aggrieved by the final assessment orders passed under Section 147 r/w Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], for three assessment years, i.e., 2015- 16, 2016-17 and 2013-14, filed appeals in IT (TP) A.No.29/CHNY/2023, IT (TP) A.No.30/CHNY/2023 and IT (TP) A.No.27/CHNY/2023, respectively, before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as ‘ITAT’].

3. ITAT by the impugned orders allowed the appeals, holding that the direction issued by the Dispute Resolution Panel [hereinafter referred to as 'DRP'] under Section 144C (5) of the Act did not contain a Document Identification Number [hereinafter referred to as 'DIN'] as mandated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes [hereinafter referred to as ‘CBDT’] by its Circular No.19/2019 [F.No.225/95/2019-ITA II] dated 14.08.2019 [hereinafter referred to as 'Circular']; that the subsequent communication intimating the DIN for DRP proceedings did not satisfy the conditions prescribed in paragraph No.3 of the circular; and that therefore, those orders are invalid in law and as a sequitur, the assessment orders which were impugned before ITAT are liable to be quashed. Challenging the common order passed by ITAT, in respect of the three assessment years, the instant appeals have been filed. The Tax Case Appeal No.80 of 2025 pertains to Assessment Year 2015-2016; the Tax Case Appeal No.81 of 2025 pertains to Assessment Year 2016-2017; and the Tax Case Appeal No.82 of

2025 pertains to Assessment Year 2013-2014.

4. Appellant in the grounds of appeal has proposed the following substantial questions of law.

“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in holding that that department has not complied with the CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019 even when the manual order was communicated with DIN and in addition to that order was also communicated by e-portal and email with intimation letter and that also had DIN and the information of the DIN of the assessment order, all these were done within 15 days as mandated in the said Circular. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had failed to consider that electronic quoting of DIN is only a procedural issue and the fact that DIN is issued only to keep track of the proceedings for audit trial of the department and to ensure genuineness of the orders passed and that non-mentioning of the DIN in the DRP order electronically which was otherwise generated immediately and informed to the assessee is sufficient compliance of the CBDT Circular No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019.

3. Whether the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in not appreciating the fact that the impugned final assessment order had electronically generated valid DIN which order alone is challenga