2026 (4) TMI 892

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....Y.2015-16. 4. In this regard, the stand of the Department was that the assessee being issued a notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2022 requiring him to furnish within 30 days from the service of the said notice, a return in the prescribed form for the A.Y. 2015-16. However, the assessee had filed return of income in response to the notice u/s.148 of the Act after the expiry of time prescribed. Such belated return, therefore, cannot be treated as a valid return for the purpose of Section 143(2) of the Act, and hence, there was no requirement of issuance of separate notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act in respect of such invalid return. The aforesaid observation finds place in the report of the A.O, Dhamtari, dated 10.11.2025 and the relevant para is extracted as follows: "On the facts of the case, it is submitted that the assessee was issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2022 requiring him to furnish within 30 days from the service of this notice, a return in the prescribed form for the Assessment Year 2015-16, the assessee filed the return of income in response to notice u/s.148 after the expiry of time prescribed. Such belated return cannot be treated as a valid return ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not in agreement with the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR. That it is an admitted fact the A.O had completed the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on the basis of the return of income filed by the assessee in pursuance to notice u/s. 148 of the Act that itself signifies that the A.O had considered the return of income as valid and on that basis, proceeded to frame the assessment as per the relevant provisions of the Act. Therefore, contention of the Ld. Sr. DR that since the return of income was itself invalid, there was no occasion for the Department to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, does not hold the ground and is absolutely incorrect and misplaced in the given facts and circumstances of the assessee's case. 9. We find that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act. Similarly, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held that issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is mandatory in reassessment proceeding....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ying out assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act, the statutory requirement of serving of valid notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is must and in absence thereof, subsequent proceedings becomes invalid. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ashok Devichand Jain Vs. Union of India, (2023) 151 taxmann.com 70 (Bombay) had held that any statutory notice, if issued, without valid inherent jurisdiction or if not issued at all, they resulted in an inherent defect in the entire procedure which is not curable. 13. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Delhi in the case of DCIT Vs. Ashutosh Foods, ITA No.234/Del/2025 & CO No.228/Del/2025, A.Y.2015-16, dated 14.01.2026 had dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's cross objection by quashing reassessment for A.Y.2015-16 on the ground that no mandatory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee before completion of the reassessment. That on plain reading of Section 143(2) of the Act, notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is required to be issued in a case whether return has been furnished u/s. 139 of the Act or in response to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act or in pursuance to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee mainly on legal grounds. As per the provisions of section 148, the Assessing Officer is required to serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish a return of his income for the relevant assessment year, "in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed, and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a re-turn required to be furnished under section 139". In this case, since there was no valid return in existence, the question of compliance with section 143(2) does not arise. The proviso is applicable to a valid return and not to an invalid return. Thus, since there was no valid return in existence, the question of compliance with section 143(2) does not arise. It is a settled principle that a legal fiction has to be taken to its logical conclusion and "therefore, what is valid for a return under section 139 will be valid with equal force to a return filed under section 148" In case the assessee has not filed a valid-return, so, issue of notice was not condition precedent for the completion of the assessment. In such cases, the Asses....