TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 974X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... magine the possible grounds why the case would be considered for transfer and then to meet such grounds by making representation. He thus made the procedure of giving hearing a mere formality. After attempting on couple of occasions to elicit further response from the Commissioner, the petitioner raised written objections under letter dated 04.01.2016 and specifically raised four grounds why the case should not be transferred. The petitioner did refer to the search and seizure operations at the residential premises of the director of the company and survey action at the factory of the petitioner company. However, this would not in any manner reduce the requirement of the prescribed authority to at least convey to the petitioner the primafacie reason why the assessment was being considered for transfer. Though unaware of the order of transfer of assessment, the petitioner had raised such detailed objections shortly thereafter. However, the fundamental action of the authority was flawed since at no point of time, the petitioner was given any idea why the assessment was under transfer. - orders set aside. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9010 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2016 - MR. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng representation: 1) That Company { Genus Electrotech Ltd.} a public limited company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act and was assessed in New Delhi upto A.Y.2008-09 and on request its jurisdiction was changed to Ahmedabad since Company has shifted its corporate office from New Delhi to Ahmedabad. Company maintains its records at Ahmedabad since 2008-09. 2) That on 30th and 31st July search and seizure operations was conducted at the residential premises of directors of the company at their residence at Gandhidham under the provisions of section 132 of Income tax Act by DDIT (Investigation) Moradabad (U.P.) and simultaneously survey was also conducted at the factory premise of the company situated at Gandhidham. 3) That on the same days search and seizure was conducted in the premises of cousin brothers assessed at Moradabad by DDIT (Investigation) Moradabad. 4) That company OBJECT in transferring its jurisdiction to Moradabad (Uttar Pradesh) because: a) Moradabad is nearly 800 KM away from Ahmedabad and it would cause great hardship to company to attend and produce records at Moradabad in day to day hearings by Income Tax Authorities. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 3 From (4) To (5) 1 M/s. Genus Electrotech Ltd AABCG9645H Dcit, Cir-2(1) (1), Ahmedabad ACIT, Central Circle, Moradabad 2. This change of jurisdiction is ordered for the sake of coordinated enquiries in search and seizure cases. This order shall take effect from 30.12.2015 . 8. This order, the petitioner has challenged in the present proceedings primarily on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. First contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the notice issued by the Principal Commissioner did not contain any reasons why the assessment was proposed to be transferred. Second contention of the counsel was that without supplying necessary information and documents though asked for and without conveying the date of further hearing, the Principal Commissioner passed the exparte order of transfer. Counsel submitted that Moradabad is situated nearly at the distance of 700 kms from Ahmedabad and transfer of assessment would therefore, cause great prejudice and inconvenience to the petitioner. 9. On th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment is proposed to be transfered would satisfy this requirement ? We would answer this question in context of the notice issued by the Principal Commissioner, the contents of which we have reproduced in the earlier portion of the order. This notice merely informed the petitioner that hearing of the petitioner's case is fixed on a particular date in respect to transfer the case to Moradabad and that the petitioner should therefore, attend the office at the appointed time. 12. For multiple reasons, this notice would fail the test of granting reasonable opportunity of hearing. Mere issuance of notice inviting attendance of an assessee for hearing of a case for transfer of the assessment can hardly be stated to be fulfillment of requirement of hearing. On what primafacie grounds or reasons the case is to be transferred, was nowhere indicated in this notice. The petitioner was left to imagine such grounds and meet with them by making a representation in writing or orally if he so desired. By not indicating any reasons, why the authority proposed to transfer the case, the Principal Commissioner merely called upon the petitioner to attend his office for hearing. This not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the noticee to put forth its point of view with regard to the reasons for the proposed action. The views of the noticee are to be considered by the authority before taking any decision to confirm or drop the notice. A show cause notice to be effective must be adequate so to enable a party to effectively object/respond to the same. The authority concerned is obliged to consider the objections, if any, and thereafter reach a finding one way or the other. This alone ensures absence of arbitrary exercise of powers by the authorities. Thus, there has been failure of Audi Alteram Partem Rule and the case of the Petitioner has been transferred in breach of natural justice de hors the nongiving of personal hearing to the Petitioner. In that view of the matter also the order dated 2/8/2012 passed by the respondent cannot be sustained. 16. In case of Shree Ram Vessel Scrap P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Incometax, reported in 355 ITR 255, Division Bench of this Court while upholding that effective and coordinated investigation is a valid reason for transfer of an assessment, upheld the action of transfer passed by the competent authority in the said case. In said case also, it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y or group. They were subjected to common search operation. Their assessments were therefore, under proposal for transfer. A show cause notice was issued to all of them in which the Commissioner called upon them to explain why the cases should not be centralised at Ahmedabad for effective and coordinated investigation. After considering their objections and permitting the oral submissions by the authorised representative, the Commissioner passed the order transferring the cases on the ground that cases were required to be centralised. Since Bhavnagar did not have Central Range Office, they could be transferred at Ahmedabad. Their request that cases be consolidated at Bhavnagar or Mumbai was considered but not accepted. They were instead offered alternative places for transfer of cases within the jurisdiction of Surat, Baroda or Rajkot Office. They did not accept the offer. It was thereupon that the Commissioner proceeded to finalise his proposed transfer of cases from Bhavnagar to Ahmedabad. 25. We do not find that the Commissioner committed any error either in law or in facts. Reason for transfer was clearly indicated in the show cause notice namely, for centralisation of cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
