https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780938 ITAT RAJKOT - AT held that notices under s.143(2) dated 17/08/2018 and 23/08/2018 were invalid because they failed to state whether scrutiny was "Limited CASS", "Complete CASS" or "Complete Manual", contrary to the CBDT format issued 23.06.2017. Under s.119 CBDT instructions are mandatory and the revenue bears the burden to prove compliance. As the AO did not follow the prescribed notice format, the consequent assessment framed under s.143(3) on 24.12.2019 was quashed. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Nov 2025 08:30:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780938 ITAT RAJKOT - AT held that notices under s.143(2) dated 17/08/2018 and 23/08/2018 were invalid because they failed to state whether scrutiny was "Limited CASS", "Complete CASS" or "Complete Manual", contrary to the CBDT format issued 23.06.2017. Under s.119 CBDT instructions are mandatory and the revenue bears the burden to prove compliance. As the AO did not follow the prescribed notice format, the consequent assessment framed under s.143(3) on 24.12.2019 was quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780938