Reassessment proceedings cannot begin before objections are decided or resume within four weeks thereafter.

The Petitioner’s return for A.Y. 2012–13 was scrutinised under Section 143(3), following detailed queries and submissions concerning share capital and share premium; the assessment was completed on 19 March 2015.

On 31 March 2019, the Revenue issued a notice under Section 148 to reopen that assessment. The Petitioner filed a return and sought the recorded reasons; before furnishing those reasons on 3 September 2019, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 143(2) on 2 September 2019.

The Petitioner objected to reopening on 2 October 2019; the objections were rejected on 31 October 2019. On 12 November 2019, before four weeks had elapsed, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 142(1).

The Court considered the Petitioner’s challenge to the notices, with the principal ground pressed being that the Section 143(2) notice preceded disposal of the objections.

Whether, in reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer may issue a notice under Section 143(2) before disposing of the assessee’s objections to reopening.

Whether the notice under Section 142(1), issued less than four weeks after the objections were rejected, could be sustained.

Under the pre-1 April 2021 reassessment framework, Section 148 required the assessee to file a return, after which the provisions of the Act applied, so far as may be, as if it were a return under Section 139; a notice under Section 143(2) initiates scrutiny of that return.

In GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO, the Supreme Court held that, after reasons are furnished and objections are filed, the Assessing Officer must dispose of the objections by a speaking order before proceeding with the assessment.

Under Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT, the Assessing Officer must not proceed further for four weeks after service of an order rejecting the objections, allowing the assessee an opportunity to challenge it.

The Court treated a Section 143(2) notice as the commencement of scrutiny of the return filed in response to a Section 148 notice—not merely as a step preceding the eventual assessment order. Because objections may challenge the jurisdictional basis for reopening, the Assessing Officer must decide them before initiating scrutiny; issuing the Section 143(2) notice first would put “the cart before the horse”.

Separately, the Section 142(1) notice was issued on 12 November 2019, before the four-week period following rejection of the objections on 31 October 2019 had expired, contrary to Asian Paints.

It did not decide the Petitioner’s other challenges to reopening; those contentions were left open.

Rule was made absolute in those terms, with no order as to costs.