Indira Banerjee, J. - (1.) IN this writ application, the petitioners have challenged a notice dated May 13, 1992, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income -tax, Special Range 13, Calcutta, under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961, seeking to reopen the assessment of taxable income of the petitioner company for the assessment year 1983 -84. According to the petitioners, on or about February 18, 1983, one Mimec (Sikkim) Investment Pvt. Ltd., incorporated under the Sikkim Registration Act, 1961, advanced an interest free loan of Rs. 25,49,300 to the petitioner -company.
(2.) ON or about October 31, 1983, the petitioner company filed its return for the assessment year 1983 -84, corresponding to the financial year 1982 -83, showing a loss of Rs. 63,270. The said return was apparently filed along with the annual report of the petitioner company containing the audited profit and loss account and balance -sheet for the relevant year, which disclosed the alleged loan of Rs. 25,49,300 allegedly advanced by Mimec (Sikkim) Investment Pvt. Ltd. to the petitioner company. The petitioners have claimed that the said loan was also disclosed in the balance -sheet of Mimec (Sikkim) Investment Pvt. Ltd. for the year in question. On March 20, 1986, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the assessment year 1983 -84 under section 143(3) of the Income -tax Act, 1961, and computed the total income of the petitioner company at Rs. 71,040 for that assessment year, as against the loss return of Rs. 63,270 after disallowing certain deductions claimed. The loan referred to above was accepted The petitioners appealed against the disallowance of expenses and other deductions and pursuant to the appellate orders the income was later recomputed at Rs. 17,340.
(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the assessment was done upon examination of all books of account and documents furnished by the petitioner company in response to notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income -tax Act, 1961.;