Jurisdictional notice defect vitiates reassessment and prevents revision under section 263 from surviving.

A reassessment initiated without a valid section 148 notice by the Assessing Officer having territorial jurisdiction was treated as void, because the decisive defect went to the competence of the jurisdictional notice itself. Although the record indicated issuance of notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1), mere non-production of the notices was not enough to displace the record-based inference. Since the reassessment was non est for want of valid jurisdictional notice, the revisional order under section 263 could not survive and was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment was void for want of a valid notice under section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer having territorial jurisdiction, and whether the Commissioner's revision under section 263 could survive if the reassessment itself was non est.

Analysis: The reassessment was initiated by an officer who lacked territorial jurisdiction, while the officer who completed the reassessment had not issued the statutory notice under section 148. In collateral revision proceedings, the validity of the underlying reassessment could be examined. On the record, the assessment notings showed issue of notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1), and mere non-production of the notices was held insufficient to dislodge the record-based inference. The decisive defect, however, was that the reassessment was not supported by a valid notice issued by the competent jurisdictional Assessing Officer, rendering the reassessment unsustainable in law.

Conclusion: The reassessment was held to be non est for want of valid jurisdictional notice, and the Commissioner's order under section 263 could not stand.

Final Conclusion: The revisionary order was quashed and the assessee succeeded on the ground that the reassessment itself was invalid for lack of territorial jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment initiated or completed without a valid statutory notice by the Assessing Officer having territorial jurisdiction is void, and a revision order founded on such a void reassessment cannot survive.

---