Facts of the Case

The appeal was filed by the Revenue challenging the ITAT order for Assessment Year 2011–12.

The assessee had participated in the assessment proceedings without raising objections regarding non-service of notice under Section 143(2).

The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3).

It was admitted that notice under Section 143(2) was not issued within the prescribed statutory period.

Issues Involved

Whether participation of the assessee in proceedings cures the absence of notice under Section 143(2) by virtue of Section 292BB?

Whether failure to issue notice under Section 143(2) invalidates jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer?

Whether objection regarding jurisdiction can be raised at a later stage?

 Petitioner’s Arguments (Revenue)

The assessee participated in proceedings and did not object to non-service of notice.

By virtue of Section 292BB, the assessee is precluded from raising such objections.

Section 124(3) bars jurisdictional objections after the stipulated time period.

Reliance was placed on judicial interpretation of Section 292BB by the Supreme Court.

 Respondent’s Arguments (Assessee)

The mandatory notice under Section 143(2) was not issued within the prescribed time.

Section 292BB applies only to defects in service of notice, not complete absence.

Lack of issuance of notice goes to the root of jurisdiction and renders assessment invalid.

 Court Findings / Order

The Court held that Section 292BB does not cure complete absence of notice, but only defects in service.

Issuance of notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory for valid assessment.

Failure to issue notice within limitation results in invalid assumption of jurisdiction.

Jurisdictional defects can be raised at any stage, including appellate proceedings.

No substantial question of law arose; hence, the appeal was dismissed.

 Important Clarification (Key Legal Principle)

Section 292BB applies only where notice has been issued but served defectively.

It cannot validate complete absence of notice.

Jurisdictional defects are fundamental and cannot be cured by participation of the assessee.

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2022:DHC:1064-DB/MMH24032022ITA622022_140238.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.