- (1.) In this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged a notice dated 25th March, 2011, issued by the Respondent Assessing Officer under section 148 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as I.T. Act, proposing to reopen assessment of income of the petitioner company in the Financial Year 2003-04 corresponding to the Assessment Year, 2004-05. It is not in dispute that assessment of the petitioner company for the aforesaid financial year had been completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 6(IV), Kolkata and an order of assessment under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, passed on 29th December, 2006.
(2.) Mr. N.K. Poddar, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, argued that the petitioner company had filed its Income Tax Return for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 on 30th September, 2004, claiming aggregate depreciation of Rs. 35,37,377/- on its various assets. The aforesaid claim of depreciation of the aggregate value of Rs.35,37,377/- included depreciation of Rs. 19,14,186/- on property rented out to Usha Martin Ltd.
(3.) Mr. Poddar submitted that the petitioner company had prepared its income tax return for the Assessment Year 2004-2005 strictly on the basis of the Tax Audit Report of M/s. S. Swarup & Co., Chartered Accountants prepared under section 44AB of the I.T. Act. The claim of the petitioner company for depreciation, including depreciation on property rented out to Usha Martin Ltd. was, according to Mr. Poddar, based on the Tax Audit Report under Section 44AB of the I.T. Act.;