AAYOJAN DEVELOPERS Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the notice dt. 12th March, 2010 issued by the Respondent under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act) reopening the assessment of the Petitioner for asst. yr. 2003-04.

(2.) The Petitioner, a firm, filed return of income on 29th Nov., 2003 declaring total income at nil. Along with the return, the Petitioner submitted statement of income in which deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act for developing and building residential units at 100 per cent was claimed at Rs. 13,45,211. A note pertaining to details about the project on which deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act was claimed, was also attached to the statement of income. Form 10CCB which is a form of audit report for claiming deduction under Section 80-IB and which is prescribed under Rule 18BBB of the IT Rules, 1962 was also annexed with the return in which total details about the project on which deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act was claimed was submitted. The balance sheet and the P&L a/c of the Petitioner were also annexed with the return.

(3.) By a notice dt. 5th July, 2005 under Section 142(1) of the Act, the AO called for details enumerated at Annex. "A" and Annex. "B" to the notice. Annexure "B" to the notice pertained to the projects developed by the Petitioner on which deduction under Section 80-IB(10) of the Act was claimed by the Petitioner. Pursuant to the said notice, the Petitioner submitted all details and after scrutinizing the same, the AO framed assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act on 28th Nov., 2005. Subsequently, by the impugned notice, the assessment for the year 2003-04 is sought to be reopened by the Respondent. Pursuant to the notice, the Petitioner filed its reply requesting the Respondent to treat the return of income filed by the Petitioner under Section 139(1) of the Act as the return filed in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act and also requested the Respondent to furnish a copy of the reasons for reopening the assessment. The gist of the reasons recorded were supplied vide a letter dt. 6th Dec, 2010. Pursuant thereto, the Petitioner filed its objections against reopening of the assessment, which came to be disposed of by an order dt. 6th Dec, 2010, holding that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was a valid notice. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner has moved the present petition challenging the impugned notice.