TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 139
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come on November 30, 2000, along with provisional tax audit report as the audit was not complete. Subsequently, notice under section 139(9) of the Act was issued by the respondent, Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax/Assessing Officer to remove the deficiency. In compliance thereof, on December 27, 2001, the petitioner filedaudited accounts with the tax audit report. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a revised return on December 22, 2002. 3. The return filed by the assessee was not taken up for scrutiny and no notice under section 143(2) was issued. 4. Subsequently, the impugned notice under section 148 dated April 16, 2003, was issued and served on the petitioner. By letter dated May 6, 2003, the petitioner informed the respondent that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the total income of the assessee and even the interest of Rs. 2,67,65,000 earned on IUF has not been included in the total income of the assessee. In addition to this issue, the assessee has also claimed long-term capital loss of Rs. 2.78 crores. Addition to share capital of Rs. 40 lakhs, deduction under section 80G and interest income claimed exempt Rs.49.67 lakhs. Therefore, I have reason to believe that income to the tune of Rs.19,43,69,995 has escaped assessment. Hence, it is requested that permission to issue notice under section 148 may be granted in this case." 7. The contention of the petitioner is that the amount deposited in the aforesaid fund, namely, Transport Infrastructure Utilisation Fund (TIUF, for short) and interest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e on the deci-sion of this court in W. P. (C.) No. 13603 of 2004 filed by the petitioner, reported in D. T. and T. D. C. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2010] 324 ITR 234 (Delhi). The petitioner had preferred a writ petition challenging the notice issued under sections 147 and 148 of the Act in respect of the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000. In the decision, it has been recorded that for the three years in question, original assessment orders under section 143(3) of the Act were passed on March 28, 2000.The Assessing Officer in the course of original proceedings had examined the nature and character of the Transport Infrastructure Facilities Utili-sation Fund and had brought interest on the said amount to tax but had not taxed the amount....