Court rules notice under Income Tax Act time-barred, favoring petitioner based on return filing date

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was time-barred. The critical date for determining the issuance of the notice was considered to be the original filing date of the return, not the date of rectification of defects. Citing previous case law and a decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the court concluded that rectifying defects within the allowed time frame related back to the original filing date. As a result, the court set aside the notice dated 15th November 2018, deeming it invalid.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act as time-barred.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered company, filed its income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17 on 17th October 2016, declaring a total income of Rs. 22.15 crores. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 139(9) on 28th August 2017 to rectify defects in the return, which were rectified by the petitioner on 12th September 2017. The petitioner contended that the original return was defective but not invalid due to technical issues. Subsequently, another notice was issued on 19th September 2017 stating that the rectified return was also defective. The petitioner represented that there were no defects in the return, which the department seemingly accepted. The Assessing Officer processed the return under Section 143(1) on 10th February 2018. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued on 10th August 2018, which the petitioner challenged as time-barred, arguing that it should have been issued by 30th September 2017, six months after the original return filing. The department contended that the notice was valid based on the date of rectification of defects on 12th September 2017.

The key question was whether the date of filing the return should be considered as 17th October 2016 (original filing) or 12th September 2017 (rectification of defects). The court referred to a previous case where it was held that rectifying defects within the permitted time relates back to the original filing date. The court emphasized that the critical date is when the return was initially presented, not when defects were rectified. A similar decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court supported this interpretation. Consequently, the court set aside the notice dated 15th November 2018 as time-barred, ruling in favor of the petitioner.

---