Assessment under section 143(3) void where section 143(2) notice issued by non-jurisdictional ward and AO failed to act

ITAT (Kolkata) held the assessment framed u/s 143(3) invalid where the 143(2) notice was issued by a non-jurisdictional ward while the return was filed with the jurisdictional ward; failure of the jurisdictional AO to issue the statutory notice rendered the assessment a nullity. Relying on HC precedents, the Tribunal quashed the assessment framed by the non-jurisdictional AO and allowed the appeal of the assessee.

---

---

ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED

1. Whether an assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is valid where no notice under section 143(2) was issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer prior to framing the assessment.

2. Whether issuance of a notice under section 143(2) by a non-jurisdictional assessing officer cures the absence of a section 143(2) notice from the jurisdictional officer, when the assessment is ultimately framed by the jurisdictional officer.

3. Whether defects in issuance of statutory notices that go to the jurisdiction of the assessing officer render the assessment a nullity and require quashing of the assessment order.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1 - Validity of assessment framed under section 143(3) without a section 143(2) notice from the jurisdictional AO

Legal framework: Section 143(2) empowers the assessing officer to issue a notice requiring the assessee to produce evidence in support of the return; section 143(3) provides for assessment after making enquiries. Jurisdictional competence and the statutory sequence of notices are integral to a valid assessment.

Precedent treatment: The Tribunal relied on prior decisions of the High Court (identified in the record as two Kolkata High Court decisions) which held that where a non-jurisdictional officer issues a section 143(2) notice and the jurisdictional officer subsequently frames the assessment without issuing his own section 143(2) notice, such assessment is invalid.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Court examined the factual matrix showing (i) the return was filed with one ward; (ii) a section 143(2) notice was issued by a different ward (non-jurisdictional); (iii) the assessee sought migration of PAN to the proper jurisdiction; (iv) the jurisdictional ward ultimately issued section 142(1) notices and framed the assessment under section 143(3) without having issued its own section 143(2) notice. The Tribunal treated the absence of a section 143(2) notice from the jurisdictional AO as a "serious lapse" that "goes to the root of the matter", holding that the statutory preconditions for valid assessment were not satisfied.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - where the jurisdictional assessing officer frames an assessment under section 143(3) without issuing the mandatory section 143(2) notice (and where the only section 143(2) notice on record was issued by a non-jurisdictional officer), the assessment is invalid and void ab initio. The Tribunal's reliance on High Court authority as binding on the point is presented as central to the decision, not as obiter.

Conclusion: The assessment framed under section 143(3) without a section 143(2) notice issued by the jurisdictional AO is quashed as invalid.

Issue 2 - Effect of section 143(2) notice issued by a non-jurisdictional AO

Legal framework: Jurisdiction to issue statutory notices is vested in the assessing officer within whose charge the assessee falls; notices issued by officers lacking jurisdiction cannot substitute for notices required from the jurisdictional officer.

Precedent treatment: The Tribunal followed High Court rulings holding that a section 143(2) notice issued by a non-jurisdictional AO does not validate an assessment later framed by the jurisdictional AO unless the jurisdictional AO itself issues the requisite notice.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal considered the sequence where a non-jurisdictional AO had issued a section 143(2) notice but the assessment was ultimately framed by a different ward which had not issued its own section 143(2) notice. The Tribunal concluded that the mere existence of a section 143(2) notice from a non-jurisdictional officer did not cure the jurisdictional defect when the assessing officer who framed the assessment had not performed the statutory act of issuing the section 143(2) notice.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - issuance of a section 143(2) notice by a non-jurisdictional officer cannot validate an assessment framed by the jurisdictional officer who himself did not issue a section 143(2) notice.

Conclusion: The presence of a section 143(2) notice from a non-jurisdictional AO is not a cure; the assessment remains invalid if the jurisdictional AO did not issue the statutory section 143(2) notice before framing the assessment.

Issue 3 - Consequence of jurisdictional defects in statutory notices

Legal framework: Fundamental fairness and statutory compliance require that notices be issued by competent officers; defects that vitiate jurisdiction are capable of rendering subsequent orders nullities.

Precedent treatment: The Tribunal applied High Court authority concluding that jurisdictional defects in notice issuance are fatal to the validity of the assessment and warrant quashing of the assessment order.

Interpretation and reasoning: On facts, the Tribunal found that the jurisdictional notice under section 143(2) was not issued by the assessing officer who ultimately framed the assessment, despite the assessee's attempts to regularize jurisdiction. The Tribunal characterized this omission as a defect "going to the root of the matter" and therefore incapable of being treated as a mere procedural irregularity.

Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - jurisdictional defects in issuance of mandatory statutory notices that affect the authority of the assessing officer render the resulting assessment void; such defects are not curable and require quashing of the assessment order.

Conclusion: The assessment was quashed on the ground that the jurisdictional defect in not issuing the mandatory section 143(2) notice rendered the assessment void ab initio.

Cross-references and outcome

See Issue 1 and Issue 2: The Tribunal's conclusion on invalidity rests on both the absence of a section 143(2) notice from the jurisdictional AO and the insufficiency of a section 143(2) notice issued by a non-jurisdictional AO to cure that absence. The Tribunal expressly followed the relevant High Court decisions on these points and allowed the appeal by quashing the assessment framed under section 143(3).

---