TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 325
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Return of Income on 28th October, 2003, declaring an income of Rs. 31.95 lakhs. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) read with Section 154 of the Act on 26th February, 2006, computing the Petitioner's book profit under Section 115JB of the Act at Rs. 1.51 Crores. This was after having allowed deduction on dividend received under Section 80M of the Act as it satisfied the conditions therein that it shall not claim deduction on dividend received more than the amount distributed by the Petitioner to its share holders before the due date of filing of return of income for the Assessment Year 2003-04 i.e. 31st October, 2003. Further, at the time of computing the book profits for the purpose of Section 115JB of the Act, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. As deduction u/s. 80M has wrongly been allowed it has resulted in underassessment of income Rs. 21978000. 3. Further while computing book profit, diminution in value of investment amounting to Rs. 10075000 was not added to the net profit for computing book profit under special provision of I. T. Act though this was added to the total income under normal provisions of I. T. Act. Omission to do so has resulted in under assessment of book profit of Rs. 10075000. 4. Thus it is seen that income chargeable to tax has been under assessed and also that excessive relief has been given for which provisions of explanatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct was amended by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1st April, 2001 which specifically included amounts set aside as provided for diminution of valuation of assets. It is, therefore, the Revenue's contention that even though at the time when the reopening notice was issued, Section 115JB of the Act did not specifically provide for adding the diminution in valuation of assets to arrive at Book Profits for the purpose of Section 115JB of the Act, yet by virtue of the amendment to Section 115JB of the Act in 2009 with retrospective effect from 2001 would make the impugned notice valid in law. 8 Mr. Jasani, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner invited our attention to an identical contention raised by the Revenue....