A.J SHASTRI, J.

The petitioner by way of present petition has challenged the legality and validity of the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ for short] and the order passed by the authority rejecting the objections raised by the petitioner dated 06.08.2010

2. Brief facts are as under:

The petitioner is a private limited company and a non-banking financial corporation registered with the Reserve Bank of India right from September 2001. The petitioner filed its return for the assessment year 2005-06 on 31.10.2005 showing total income of Rs.24,41,300/- and the said return has been submitted along with a detailed computation of income, copy of accounts including profit and loss and balance sheet and in addition thereto, a copy of audit report under Section 44AB.

3. The petitioner was, during the assessment proceedings, asked to furnish detail particulars by way of issuing notice under Section 142(1) on 29.01.2007 inter alia asking the petitioner to clarify 17 points enumerated in the said notice. One of the points which was a center of controversy was pertaining to the details regarding bad debts written off and its justification which is reflected on Item No. (xi) in the said communication.

4. The petitioner has submitted various replies on each of the points and one of such explanation in the form of reply was dated 17.09.2007 which was made a part of the record of the petition. Having considered the reply submitted by the petitioner and having satisfied, the Assessing Officer did not disallow it by adding it back in the computation of income and has passed assessment order under Section 143(3) on 29.10.2007 The said scrutiny assessment has considered the issue pertaining to bad debts written off and its justification. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV then became the Assessing Officer of the petitioner and had issued notice under Section 148 on 16.12.2009 under the Income Tax Act stating that he has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and thereby required the petitioner to submit the return. In turn, the petitioner submitted a reply on 21.12.2009 stating inter alia that earlier return, which has been filed on 31.10.2005, be considered as a return in response to the notice under Section 148. Later on, under the communication dated 22.12.2009, the petitioner has requested the authority to furnish the reasons for reopening. In response to the said request, the respondent authority supplied reasons which were recorded on 04.12.2009 under the communication and cover of letter dated 05.03.2010 Having gone through the reasons initially, the petitioner has challenged the said notice under Section 148 by way of filing writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 6461 of 2010. However, since the procedure which was contemplated having not observed by the petitioner as has been laid down in the decision of Supreme Court in case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, reported in 259 ITR 19, the Hon'ble Court had rejected the petition summarily vide order dated 21.06.2010 For immediate perusal the said order is reproduced hereafter:

“1. The petition challenges notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 16th December, 2009 for assessment year 2005-2006. Considering the fact that after reasons have been supplied, the petitioner has not followed the procedure as enunciated by the Apex court in the case of GKN DRIVESHAFTS (INDIA) LTD. v. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, reported in 2003 ITR 19, the petition is not required to be entertained, more particularly, as the impugned notice has been issued within a period of 4 (four) years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

2. Hence, without entering into the discussion and the merits of the issue involved, the petition is rejected for the afore-stated rea