Jurisdictional defect in section 148 notice renders reassessment void when issued by an officer lacking authority.

A reassessment cannot be sustained where the section 148 notice is issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction over the assessee's case. The article explains that "Assessing Officer" for section 147 purposes means the officer vested with jurisdiction under section 2(7A) and section 120 or otherwise. Because the notice was issued by the wrong Income Tax Officer before the case was transferred, the notice had no legal validity and the resulting reassessment was void. The assessment was therefore quashed for want of jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether reassessment proceedings could be sustained when the notice under section 148 was issued by an Assessing Officer not vested with jurisdiction over the assessee's case.

Analysis: The reassessment was founded on a notice under section 148 issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Phagwara, though jurisdiction over the assessee lay with the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Phagwara. The record showed that the case was transferred only after issuance of that notice. The expression "Assessing Officer" in section 147 has to be understood in the sense defined in section 2(7A), namely the officer vested with relevant jurisdiction under section 120 or otherwise. A notice issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction had no legal sanctity, and an assessment based on such invalid notice could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were invalid and the assessment was rightly quashed for want of jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment under section 147 cannot stand unless the notice under section 148 is issued by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the assessee's case; a notice issued by a non-jurisdictional officer is void and renders the consequent assessment unsustainable.

---