Sai Kumar Mateti Vs ITO (Telangana High Court)
Unsigned Reassessment Notice Quashed: Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 148 Notice for Mandatory Non-Compliance
The Telangana High Court, in the case of Sri Sai Kumar Mateti v. Income Tax Officer, quashed a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the notice was not authenticated in the manner mandated by law. The notice dated 31.03.2021, issued for the Assessment Year 2013–14, did not bear either a manual signature or a digital signature of the issuing authority.
The Court examined the statutory requirement under Section 282A of the Income-tax Act, which mandates that any notice issued by an income-tax authority must be duly signed, either in physical form or through digital authentication. It was observed that the impugned notice, as well as the copy produced by the Department, admittedly lacked such authentication. The Revenue’s contention that subsequent participation by the assessee or later digitally signed approvals could cure the defect was expressly rejected.
Emphasising that compliance with Section 282A is mandatory and not a mere procedural formality, the High Court held that the reassessment notice was invalid and bad in law. Consequently, all proceedings initiated pursuant to the unsigned notice were rendered unsustainable and were quashed. However, since the interference was on a technical ground, the Court reserved liberty to the Department to initiate fresh proceedings strictly in accordance with law. No order as to costs was made.
