Jurisdictional defect in reassessment notice sent to wrong address rendered reopening invalid and assessment unsustainable.

Reassessment under the Income-tax Act failed because the section 148 notice was issued to an incorrect address despite the correct address already appearing in the Department's records. A valid notice within limitation is a jurisdictional precondition for reopening, and dispatch to a wrong address does not satisfy the statutory requirement when the assessee's recorded address is available. The defect was held to go to the root of jurisdiction and was not cured by later correspondence or the assessee's awareness of proceedings. The reopening was therefore invalid and the assessment framed on that basis was quashed in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment initiated under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was valid when the notice was issued to an incorrect address despite the correct address being available in the departmental record, and whether the consequent assessment could survive.

Analysis: The reassessment notice dated 30.03.2010 was found to have been issued to the assessee at BE-63, Hari Nagar, New Delhi, whereas the return already filed for the relevant assessment year and earlier years showed the address at BK-22, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, which was available with the Department before issuance of the notice. In reassessment proceedings, the issuance of a valid notice within limitation is a jurisdictional requirement, and where the Department records already disclose the correct address, issuing the notice to a wrong address cannot be treated as compliance with the statutory mandate. The defect went to the root of jurisdiction and was not cured by subsequent correspondence or awareness of proceedings.

Conclusion: The reopening under section 148 was held to be invalid and the assessment framed pursuant thereto was quashed, in favour of the assessee.

---