2.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the impugned notice is untenable in view of the fact that even before furnishing reasons for reopening of assessment and even before disposing of the objections to be submitted by the petitioner, the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued for the purpose of proceeding with reassessment. Such a procedure followed by the respondent is in violation of the procedures contemplated and further, contrary to the precedence laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court of India. The notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued in proceeding dated 25.01.2016, stating that the petitioner is required to deliver to the Assessing Officer within 30 days from the date of service of the notice, a return in the prescribed form of the income for the assessment year 2009-10. The petitioner submitted his response on 03.02.2016, stating that the Return of Income ('ROI') filed earlier shall be treated as right. Again, the Assessing Officer in proceedings dated 04.02.2016, issued the notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, directing the petitioner/assessee to appear in person or through representative on 19th February, 2016. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated that the period of 30 days contemplated in the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act had not expired during the relevant point of time and further, the petitioner, in his letter dated 03.02.2016, requested the Assessing Officer to furnish the reasons for reopening. Before following the procedures contemplated, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and therefore, the said impugned order is untenable. After issuing the impugned proceedings on 04.02.2016, the Assessing Officer furnished the reasons for reopening of assessment in a proceeding dated 29.04.2016 and the petitioner filed his objections on 13.06.2016 and thereafter, the objections were disposed of on 12.09.2016.
