Reassessment notice validity turns on actual issuance within limitation, not mere preparation of reasons or draft notice.

A reassessment notice under the Income-tax Act is valid only if it is actually issued, meaning it is despatched or otherwise put into circulation within the limitation period; mere preparation of the notice and recording of reasons in time is insufficient. The department bears the burden of showing timely issuance, and a rebuttable presumption of regularity cannot stand where the record does not show earlier despatch and service occurred much later. On these facts, the notice under section 148 was held bad in law and the reassessment was annulled.

---

---

Issues: Whether a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was validly issued within the prescribed period of limitation when it was prepared and reasons were recorded within time but there was no material to show that it was actually despatched or set in motion before expiry of limitation.

Analysis: The statutory requirement under section 148 is satisfied only when the notice is actually issued within time; service is a condition precedent only for making the reassessment order. The distinction between mere preparation of the notice and its issuance was material, and the burden lay on the department to show that the notice had been put into circulation within the limitation period. The presumption of regularity under the Evidence Act was rebuttable and stood displaced on the facts, because the notice was prepared well before expiry of limitation but served much later, with no record showing earlier despatch.

Conclusion: The notice under section 148 was bad in law, and the reassessment was rightly annulled.

Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment notice is valid only when it is actually issued, meaning it is despatched or otherwise set in motion for service within the limitation period; mere preparation of the notice does not amount to issuance.

---