Urmish M. Udani Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
No valid notice u/s 143(2); one notice was premature (before return) & the other was time-barred- Entire 147/143(3) assessment held void ab initio – ITAT Mumbai quashes reassessment
A survey u/s 133A was conducted in the case of U.S. Roofs Ltd. & U.S. Realty Ltd. (group concerns of the assessee, who was the Managing Director). AO issued a notice u/s 148 on 24.11.2010, & simultaneously issued notice u/s 142(1) & 143(2) on 02.02.2011. However, Assessee filed his return of income only on 03.03.2011.
Tribunal noted a crucial jurisdictional flaw: The first notice u/s 143(2) dated 02.02.2011 was issued BEFORE the return was filed. Hence, it was premature & non est in law, because a notice u/s 143(2) can only be issued after examining a filed return.
After the assessee filed the return on 03.03.2011, AO was required to issue a fresh valid 143(2) notice within 6 months from the end of FY in which return was filed, i.e. by 30.09.2011. Instead, AO issued another 143(2) only on 10.07.2012, which was beyond the statutory time limit & therefore time-barred.
Thus:
First 143(2) = invalid (issued before return)
Second 143(2) = invalid (issued after limitation)
