J. P. Devadhar, J. - (1.) In these two writ petitions, the notices issued under Sec.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('act' for short) both dated February 18, 2005 relating to the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 are challenged. Even the objections raised by the assessee have been rejected by the assessing officer. Since the reasons for re-opening the assessment are identical, both the petitions are heard and disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) For the sake of convenience, we set out the reasons recorded for re-opening the assessment for a. Y.1999-2000 which read as follows : "m/s. GERMAN REMEDIES LTD. A. Y.1999-2000 it is seen from the assessment records that: 1) Expenses on interest, royalty, consultancy and analytical fees paid in foreign currency were allowed though the assessee has not furnished any evidence to show that TDS has been deducted at source before remitting it.2) Deduction of gross dividend has been allowed against the allowable net dividend.3) Central Excise duty and Customs duty payable on finished goods were not taken into account while valuing closing stock.4) Processing charges received by the assessee for the job work done for others out of the profit for allowing deduction u/s.80-IA / 80-IB has not been excluded while finalising the assessment. I have, therefore, reason to believe that income assessable to tax has escaped assessments issue notice u/s.148 of the I. T. Act, 1961. (SAMIR TEKRIWAL)DCIT, Cir.6 (3), Mumbai. " In the assessment year 2000-2001, the very same reasons are recorded except item No.2 set out hereinabove.
(3.) For the assessment year 1999-2000, the return of income was filed on December 29, 1999. On january 31, 2002, the assessment order under Section 143 (3) of the Act was passed determining income at rs.23,68,07,847/- after making various additions and disallowances.;