Assessment without serving statutory notice under Section 143(2) is invalid and renders the assessment naught.

ORDER

The Assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 16.06.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi -26 on as many as 10 grounds, however, Ld. AR has only argued the jurisdictional ground viz. Ground No.1, which reads as under:-

“The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that issuing and serving the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is pre-requisite and jurisdictional fact; and the assessment made, without issuing and serving the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, is null and void ab initio, invalid, untenable, illegal; and thereby erred in setting aside the assessment order dated 25.03.2025 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act for making fresh assessment, denovo.”

2. The facts emanate from the assessment order are that assessee is a partnership firm in the name of and style of M/s Amar Chemicals and is engaged in the business of trading of items used in worship like, Moly, Roly, Red Lead, Camphor apart from this, firm is also engqged in the trading of some chemicals used in cooking like Ajinomot, Satiric and Tatrick. The assessee filed its original return of income for the AY 2019-20 on 23.10.2019 declaring an income of Rs. 2,41,560/-. A survey u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted in the cases of M/s Chemical Agency and M/s Amar Chemical on 31.10.2018 at their business premises situated at 420, Katra Maidgran, Tilak Bazar, Khari Baoli, Delhi and 2140, Tilak Bazar, Delhi by Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit-8(2), Delhi. Based on the information, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. Thereafter, assessment was compelted at an income of Rs. 7,41,464/-.

3. Aggrieved with the aforesaid order, assessee filed the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 16.06.2025 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by setting aside the assessment order for making fresh assessment de novo.

4. Against the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5. At the time of hearing Ld. Counsel of the assessee argued only on the issue involved in ground no. 1 relating to service of jurisdictional notice u/s. 143(2) before exparte assessment framed u/s. 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. He submitted that in this case assessee filed its return of income u/s. 139 on 23.10.2019 and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2023. In response to notice dated 30.3.2023, assessee submitted its reply dated 31.03.2023 by stating that original return filed by the assessee on 23.10.2019 may kindly be treated as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act, which was not controverted or disputed by the AO. On 27.2.2024, the asseseee submitted its further reply by reiterating the similar version as narrated in its earlier reply dated 31.3.2023, which was also not controverted or disputed by the AO. It was further submitted that in a case where a return of income was filed and thereafter, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued directing the assessee to file the return of income; the assessee, by way of a letter, can request that such earlier return of income be considered a return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act, and such return of income is a valid return of income. To support his view, Ld. AR relied upon the case law in the case of R.K. Gupta vs. ITO (2008) 115 ITD 384 ( ITA T-Delhi); ITO v. Malvika Arun Somaiya ITA No. 3041/Mum/2004 decided on 27.09.2007; Tiwari Kanhaiya Lal vs. CIT (1985) 154 ITR 109 (Raj); Iqbal Singh Atwal vs. CIT (1984) 147 ITR 599 (Cal); K.s. Ratnaswami vs. Addl. ITO (1963