By the Court.—Heard Shri Ashish Bansal learned counsel for appellant and learned Standing Counsel for respondent.

2. This is an appeal at the instance of Assessee preferred under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘’Act 1961"). Dispute relates to Assessment Year 2003-2004. Appeal has arisen from judgment and order dated 24.7.2014, passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench ‘A’ Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No. 382/LKW/2011 whereby the aforesaid appeal of Assessee has been partly allowed. Though, in the memo of this appeal, several substantial questions of law have been formulated by appellant but learned counsel for appellant at the outset stated that he propose to press only one substantial question of law relating to notice under Section 143(2) of Act, 1961 since, if that question is decided in his favour, entire matter will be open to appellant to be raised before Assessing Authority.

3. With consent of learned counsel for parties, we proceed to hear this appeal finally on the following substantial question of law:

“Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that non issue of notice under Section 143(2) would not vitiate assessment, made by Assessing Authority, since Assessee filed return under Section 148 after expiry of the period prescribed in law.”

4. It is not a disputed fact that before making assessment in question, no notice under Section 143(2) was issued to the appellant by Assessing Authority.

5. Brief facts necessary to understand the dispute in question and for effective adjudication of the issues raised in this appeal are stated as under.

6. Appellant filed return for Assessment Year 2003-2004 on 2.5.2005 showing an income of Rs. 12,64,32,143/-.

7. Since return was filed after period prescribed for filing return under Section 139 of Act 1961, Assessing Authority treated return as nonest and proceeded under Section 148 by issuing notice under the said provision on 25.5.2007. However, before so proceeding, no notice under Section 143(2) was issued to appellant.

8. Assessing Officer passed Assessment Order on 31.12.2008 whereagainst appellant preferred appeal under Section 246-A of Act 1961 which was decided on 31.3.2011, where against Assessee and Revenue both preferred appeal before Tribunal, Assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2003-2004 has been partly allowed but issue raised by appellant with regard to patent illegality in the entire assessment proceedings for want of notice under Section 143(2) has been negated by Tribunal observing that absence of notice would not vitiate assessment since assessee filed return after expiry of the period prescribed. Tribunal following Patna Bench Tribunal’s decision in Chand Bihari Agrawal v. ACIT in IT(SS)A No. 05/PAT/2010 held, return of income must be filed within the statutory time limit. If Assessee file return after expiry of time, the return would be treated as not filed in conformity with law and therefore, absence of notice under Section 143(2) would be of no consequence. This is clear from paragraph-10 of impugned judgment of Tribunal, up for consideration before us.

9. Tribunal has further held that notice under Section 148 was issued to appellant on 25.5.2007. Assessee did not file any return as per aforesaid notice and instead submitted reply that he has already filed return on 2.5.2005 and the same should be accepted as return filed in compliance to the notice under Section 148. Thereafter, a notice under Section 142(1) was issued on 14.11.2008. Another notice under Section 142(1) was issued on 4.12.2008. Earlier notice dated 4.11.2008 remained un-complied but pursuant to notice dated 4.12.2008, Shri Rajesh Kanodia appeared before Assessing Authority on 11.12.2008. Neither, Assessee nor Revenue could give the date on which Assessee submitted reply to notice dated 25.5.2007 requesting Assessing Authority to treat return filed on 2.5.2005 as return in compliance to notice under Section