TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 497
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l hearing today. 2. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the notice dated 30.03.2018 issued by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act" for short). 3. Facts in brief are as under: 3.1 The petitioner is a public limited Company. The petitioner filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 30.11.2011 declaring total loss at Rs. 152,86,90,736/- under the normal provisions and book profit u/s. 115JB of Rs. 282,23,09,975/- The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) were issued and served upon the petitioner from time to time. Subsequently, the petitioner filed the revised return on 29.03.2013, declaring to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... particulars. Merely because there is reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment is not sufficient to reopen the assessment beyond a period of four years. The escapement must have been as a result of failure to disclose fully and truly all the material facts. The facts of the present case would indicate that there was no such failure. 4.2 The revenue's perception is that as per the depreciation chart furnished at Annexure F of the 3CD report, it is evident that the assessee company had claimed excess depreciation against allowable depreciation. It is therefore apparent that having relied on the annexure of the report of the petitioner, there was no fresh and tangible material for the revenue to hold that the income of the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... description and the printing suggested that there was no full and true disclosure. On verification of Annexure F, it is found that the assessee has not quantified the additional depreciation @ 10% on the eligible assets purchased in the preceding previous years and has made passing remarks without substantiating its claim. There was therefore no full and true disclosure on the claim of additional depreciation of 10%. 5.2 Mr. Raval, learned counsel would submit that in the year under consideration i.e AY 2011-12, the assessee had claimed balance additional depreciation @10% on the new assets being plant and machinery put to use for a period of less than 180 days in preceding year 2009-10. As per Section 32(1)(iia), the assessee is entitled....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ened beyond a period of four years and it is not a case where it can be said that the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. 7.1 The tax audit report specifically stated that the balance of additional depreciation pertaining to eligible assets has been claimed and a schedule was annexed. A detailed questionnaire was sent to the petitioner which was answered including the question on the claim of depreciation. 8. During the course of assessment proceedings as pointed out by Mr. Soparkar, learned advocate for the assessee in para 7 of the questionnaire dated 13.10.2014, details were specifically asked for in addition to fixed assets and documentary evidence in respect to additions so....