Jurisdictional notice under section 143(2) must come from the proper assessing officer in scrutiny assessments.

A scrutiny assessment requires a valid notice under section 143(2) from the officer having jurisdiction over the case, and that jurisdiction must match the CBDT monetary allocation instruction. Where the notice and related notices were issued by the Income-tax Officer despite the assessee's income placing the case with the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner, the jurisdictional defect is fundamental. An assessment framed without a valid jurisdictional notice cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment was invalid and liable to be quashed because the notice under section 143(2) was issued by an officer lacking pecuniary jurisdiction and the assessment was completed without a valid jurisdictional notice.

Analysis: The return was selected for scrutiny and the notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Kolkata, although the assessee's income fell within the monetary range placing the case with the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011. The statutory notice under section 143(2) is mandatory for a scrutiny assessment and must be issued by the assessing officer having jurisdiction over the case. The assessment was ultimately framed by the Deputy Commissioner without a valid notice from the jurisdictional officer. The defect went to the root of the assessment and could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The assessment was invalid and was rightly quashed.

---