Reassessment jurisdiction and limitation: notice by a non-assessing officer and a time-barred reopening were treated as invalid.

Reassessment under Sections 147 and 148 was stated to require initiation by the Assessing Officer who completed the original assessment, because that officer alone could form the requisite belief on the earlier record; a notice issued by another officer was therefore treated as without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. The note also states that a subsequent Section 148 notice issued by the Assessing Officer after expiry of the limitation period under Section 149(1)(b) was time-barred and could not revive the reassessment. On that reasoning, the impugned notices and consequential order were held invalid.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether reassessment under Section 148 could be initiated by an officer who was not the Assessing Officer who had completed the original assessment. (ii) Whether the later notice under Section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer was valid when it was beyond the limitation period for reopening.

Issue (i): Whether reassessment under Section 148 could be initiated by an officer who was not the Assessing Officer who had completed the original assessment.

Analysis: The original assessment for the relevant assessment year had been completed under Section 143(3). The reasons for reopening and the first notice under Section 148 were issued by an Income Tax Officer who was not the Assessing Officer of the assessee for that assessment year. Reopening powers under Sections 147 and 148 are to be exercised by the officer who passed the original assessment order, since that officer alone can form the requisite belief on the basis of the earlier assessment. The fact that the statute defines Assessing Officer broadly does not cure the absence of jurisdiction in the officer who initiated reopening in this case.

Conclusion: The first notice and the reopening founded on it were invalid and liable to be quashed.

Issue (ii): Whether the later notice under Section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer was valid when it was beyond the limitation period for reopening.

Analysis: A second notice was issued by the Assessing Officer, but it was issued after the statutory deadline for reopening under Section 149(1)(b). Once the limitation period expired, the reassessment could not be revived by issuing a fresh notice. The defect was therefore not curable, and the subsequent order rejecting objections also could not stand.

Conclusion: The later notice was time-barred and invalid.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings failed both on jurisdiction and limitation, and the impugned notices and consequential order were quashed, leaving the assessee successful.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment under Sections 147 and 148 must be initiated by the Assessing Officer who completed the original assessment, and any notice issued beyond the statutory limitation period under Section 149 is void.

---