TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... According to the petitioner, on October 28, 1998, a search and seizure operation was carried out in the house and premises of one Dr. Radha Charan Mohanty and Dr. Sujta Mohanty, who are the parents of the petitioner. The said operation was also carried out in respect of one Dr. Madhumita Mohanty, Dr. Jagat Ballav Jagdev, who is the sister and brother-in-law, respectively, of the petitioner as well as one M/s. Women's Clinic and Nursing Home at Cuttack, a partnership firm of the aforesaid relatives of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, it is evident from the assessment orders for the block period in respect of the aforesaid assessees, as enclosed to the writ petition, the said block assessments were completed under the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Deputy Commissioner, Income-tax Circle 3(1), Cuttack to transfer the proceeding to respondent No.2 at Nagaon, nothing was done in the matter. On the contrary, the said authority by letter dated September 18, 2001, asked the petitioner to explain certain deposits in her bank account No. 4239 in the Bank of India, Cuttack and also certain acquisitions of immovable property by the petitioner, details of which were mentioned in the communication dated September 18, 2001. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, while the matter was so situated, she received a notice from the Commissioner of Income-tax, Guwahati dated September 24, 2001, requiring her to show cause as to why her case should not be transferred from respondent No.2 to the Deput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive reasons and for co-ordinated and effective investigation in connection with the block assessment proceeding. Challenging the aforesaid order dated September 28, 2001, the present writ petition has been filed. I have heard Sri R. Goenka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri U. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel, Income-tax Department. The arguments advanced by Sri Goenka, learned counsel for the petitioner have been short and precise. Learned counsel has submitted that the power vested under section 127 of the Act is a quasi-judicial power and though the contours of the said power cannot be entrapped within any set parameters, the reasons for exercise of the power must have a reasonable connection with the object that is sought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the writ petition, Sri Goenka has submitted that as the said assessments were completed even before initiation of the proposal for transfer of the case of the petitioner to Cuttack, the transfer eventually made on the grounds assigned has no reasonable connection with the stated object. The exercise of the power, therefore, is contended by Sri Goenka to be on legally fragile. grounds. Sri Goenka, learned counsel for the petitioner, has further submitted that the block assessment proceedings of the relatives of the petitioner completed in the months of October-November, 2000 were set aside in appeal by orders dated January 30, 2001. Thereafter, an approach was made to the Income-tax Settlement Commission and under orders passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al power vested in the high functionaries of the Department to be exercised for administrative compulsions and necessities connected with the smooth investigation of connected cases and to facilitate orderly conduct of assessment proceedings in situations where an assessee though connected with an ongoing assessment proceeding in another case is outside the jurisdiction of the latter assessing authority. The statute itself imposes certain restrictions on the exercise of power; the same would seem to indicate that the Legislature had intended the power under section 127 of the Act to be exercised sparingly and for good and sufficient reasons. The requirement of recording reasons and giving of prior opportunity, as contemplated by the statute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... about a year prior to the order dated September 28, 2001, yet, for an ostensible centralized investigation pertaining to those concluded assessments, the case of the petitioner was transferred to Cuttack by the impugned order dated September 28, 2001. The block assessments of the Dr. R. C. Mohanty group of cases, though closed in October-November, 2000, were set aside in appeal on January 30, 2001. On what terms the appeals were allowed have not been made known to the court. If the said appeals were disposed of with certain directions in terms of which further investigations into the Dr. R. C. Mohanty group of cases were still open, perhaps the Department would still have had a justification to transfer the case of the petitioner in Septe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
