“4.Considering the submissions made by either side, this Court is of the considered opinion that undoubtedly, the order impugned dated 04.02.2016 issued under Section 143 (2) of the Act was not in accordance with the procedures contemplated. Even before furnishing reasons for reopening of assessment and before considering the objections to be submitted by the petitioner/assessee, the Assessing Officer directed the assessee to appear in person or through representative for the purpose of proceeding with the reassessment. However, the respondent had not acted upon and further, considered the request made by the petitioner and issued an order furnishing reasons for reopening and thereafter, the petitioner had also submitted his objections for the reasoning and the said objections were also considered and an order was passed on 12.09.2016. In view of the fact that the order impugned dated 04.02.2016 issued under Section 143 (2) of the Act is not been acted upon and further, the said order has not caused any prejudice to the interest of the petitioner for the purpose of defending his case, no further consideration is required. However, the order was issued not in accordance with the procedures contemplated. Thus, the order passed by the respondent in proceeding in PAN No.AAACM6890R dated 04.02.2016 became nonest, and the respondent is directed to proceed with all further proceedings issued in accordance with law, and complete the re~assessment proceedings as expeditiously as possible.
