TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 633
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment order without issuing and serving mandatory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset inviting our attention to the order passed u/s. 7(1) of Right to Information Act, 2005 dated 18.08.2025 by the ITO, Ward- 36(1), submitted that the ITO had stated in the said order that no notice u/s. 143(2) has been issued for the A.Y.2018-19 for the reason that the return filed by the assessee was treated as invalid and the provisions of section 143(2) apply only in cases where a valid return is filed. The Ld. Counsel further invited our attention to the department's notification and the questionnaire explaining how to verify e-return and submitted that for question No.13 the department had clarified that e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urnished the following submissions :- 1. No notice u/s 143(2) of the Act is issued and served upon the assessee: - Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 07.04.2022 (PB Pg-179) - Assessee filed return of income on 30.04.2022 in response to section 148 notice. (PB Pg.180) - Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 16.06.2023 stating that the return of income filed on 30.04.2022 is invalid as the same is not e-verified. As such requested to e-verify the same. (PB Pg. 181-184) - Reply dated 18.07.2023 filed stating that the manual signed copy of the ITR has been sent to the Ld. ITO and Ld, CPC and also enclosed the copy of the letters and signed ITR. (PB Pg. 190-214). This is done as per the Income Tax D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.2017 (High Court of Delhi). Further, the RTI order dated 21.08.2025 (filed separately) from the Ld. AO is received by the Assessee wherein it has been mentioned that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act is issued as the ITR-V was received after the due date i.e. on 20.07.2023. It is submitted that the same is irrelevant consideration for the non-issuance of the Section 143(2) notice. This issue is also no longer res-integra and it has been held that even if the return is filed belatedly then also the said jurisdictional notice has to be mandatorily issued. Reliance is placed upon the following judgments: a) PCIT vs. M/s Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 10/2022 dated 17.11.2023 (High Court of Delhi) (filed separately) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation filed by the assessee under RTI, no notice u/s. 143(2) has been issued for A.Y.2018-19. In our considered view once the return is treated as accepted and acted upon it cannot be treated as invalid return. 8. In the case of Anil Agarwal HUF vs. ITO in ITA No. 2594/Del/2024 dated 30.07.2025 the coordinate Bench of the Delhi Tribunal had considered a situation where the AO treated the return filed belatedly by the assessee in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act as invalid and the AO was of the view that no notice under section 143(2) is required to be issued before completion of assessment. On these facts the Tribunal held as under :- "8. Heard rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt decline to answer the question on an appeal filed by the Revenue. The Hon'ble High Court further affirming the order of the Tribunal held as under: "14. In any event, factually the Assessee filed a return pursuant to notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, notwithstanding that it may not have filed a return in the first place u/s 139 of the Act for the assessment year in question. Once a return is filed notice u/s 143(2) of the Act to the assessee is mandatory prior to framing an assessment. The question of framing an assessment ex parte without even issuing a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act did not arise. The mandatory nature of that requirement is settled not only by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue ....