The assessee filed its return within the prescribed due date on October 28, 2017, and rectified defects pointed out under section 139(9) on August 19, 2018, following which a notice under section 143(2) was issued on September 22, 2019 initiating scrutiny, and the assessment was upheld by the CIT(A). On appeal, the Tribunal held that the limitation for issuing notice under section 143(2) runs from the year in which the original return was filed and not from the year in which the defect was cured, since the proviso to section 139(9) permits removal of defects up to the framing of assessment and empowers AO to condone delay in curing defects, which he had in fact done by processing the return under section 143(1) and issuing a refund; the Department’s contention that the original return should be treated as invalid for non-removal of defect within time was self-defeating, since in that case no valid return would exist on which to found a notice under section 143(2) at all. As the notice under section 143(2) was issued beyond the limitation period reckoned from the date of the original return, the assessment framed was without jurisdiction and was quashed. (AY. 2017-18)