Jurisdictional defect in reassessment notice cannot be cured by section 292BB when the issuing officer lacked authority.

A reassessment notice under section 148 issued by an Assessing Officer lacking territorial jurisdiction is void ab initio and cannot sustain reassessment. Jurisdiction depends on empowerment under section 120 or otherwise within section 2(7A); on the stated facts, the Delhi-based assessee was not assessable by the Agra officer, so the notice failed at the threshold. Section 292BB did not cure the defect because it applies prospectively from 1 April 2008, was inapplicable to assessment year 2001-02, and addresses only defects in service, timing, or manner of service, not a notice issued by a non-jurisdictional authority.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the reassessment notice under section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer at Agra was valid when that officer had no jurisdiction over the assessee; and (ii) whether section 292BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 cured the defect in service or issuance of that notice.

Issue (i): whether the reassessment notice under section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer at Agra was valid when that officer had no jurisdiction over the assessee.

Analysis: An Assessing Officer can act only when vested with jurisdiction under section 120 or otherwise empowered within the meaning of section 2(7A). The assessee was a Delhi company, had its registered office in Delhi, and had filed earlier returns in Delhi. On those facts, the officer at Agra was not the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee. A notice for reassessment issued by a non-jurisdictional officer is not a valid notice under section 148 and the defect goes to the root of the matter.

Conclusion: The reassessment notice was void ab initio and the reassessment founded on it could not be sustained.

Issue (ii): whether section 292BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 cured the defect in service or issuance of that notice.

Analysis: Section 292BB, introduced with effect from 1 April 2008, applies prospectively and was held inapplicable to assessment year 2001-02. In any event, the provision deems proper service only where the assessee appears in a valid proceeding or cooperates in a valid inquiry, and it addresses defects of service, timing, or manner of service. It does not cure a notice issued by an authority lacking jurisdiction, nor does it bar a jurisdictional objection of this nature.

Conclusion: Section 292BB did not apply and did not cure the jurisdictional defect.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment was invalid because it was initiated by an officer lacking jurisdiction, and the curative deeming provision could not save the defect.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment notice issued by an Assessing Officer lacking jurisdiction is void ab initio, and section 292BB cannot validate a notice suffering from such a jurisdictional defect.

---