Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that the reason, perhaps, was that the Assessing Officer was already aware of the address change. The Tribunal had also recorded a finding of fact that the new address was available in the record of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer had in his record the screenshot of the material available with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs indicating a change of address. A perusal of the reply dated March 16, 2016, disclosed that the assessee had objected to the notice under section 148 of the Act being directed to the old address before the completion of the reassessment proceedings, and hence, the provisions of section 292BB was not applicable. Therefore, the notice under section 148 of the Act was improperly served. The Court also held that the Assessing Officer ought to have issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The submission advanced on behalf of the Department that, while it could consider the invalid return while framing the assessment order, it was not obliged to issue a notice under section 143(2) of the Act because it was not filed within the time frame given in section 148 notice was untenable in law, since the return of income, which was belated, was considered by the Assessing Officer while carrying out the assessment. The absence of notice, under section 143(2), gave the proceedings a jurisdictional defect and, hence, rendered it invalid in the eyes of the law. The notice under section 143(2) of the Act should have been issued before framing of the assessment order under section 147 / 144 of the Act.(AY.2010-11)