9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 127 of the Act for the reasons enumerated therein and had invited objections. The petitioner company filed a written objection. An opportunity of hearing was granted by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-IV, respondent No.1. Thereafter, in exercise of powers under section 127(1) and (2) of the Act on November 30, 2006, order was passed transferring the case of the petitioners from the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-XI, Kolkata to the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, XIX, New Delhi. The said order of transfer is the subject matter of challenge. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the notice proposing transfer was general in nature, vague and ambiguous, was issued mechanically and without an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether the notice discloses sufficient reason for transfer and, secondly, whether the impugned order deals with the written objection filed by the petitioner. In order to address the issues, it is necessary to set out the notice dated November 14, 2006, proposing transfer which is as under : "Dated : 14-11-2006 Sub. : Transfer of jurisdiction over your case to DCIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi. Sir, Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-III, New Delhi ; has pro posed centralization of your case with DCIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi, for conducting co-ordinated investigation in connection with the search undertaken against Radico Khaitan Ltd. and other associated cases on 14-02-2006. You are requested to submit your objection, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loyees of the company are not willing to go to New Delhi from Kolkata for conducting the I.T. cases, company law work. Moreover, this will consume lot of time and also monetary expenses required to be done. 9. In the absence of any infrastructure of the company at New Delhi it will create a lot of difficulties for conducting the I. T. cases and other legal matters. Moreover, only for the I. T matter the company is not willing to set up any office or infrastructure at New Delhi. 10. To prepare all the infrastructure at Delhi and to manage the employees at Delhi it is highly expensive. 11. We have no connection with Radico Khaitan Ltd. 12. No search was conducted in our case at Delhi or in U. P. or in Kolkata. If there is any informat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT-IV/Jur-7/Centralisation/06-07/4518 Dated 30-11-2006. Order under section 127 In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and of all other powers enabling me in this behalf, I, Commissioner of Income-tax, Kol-IV, hereby transfer the case, particulars of which is mentioned in col. 3 of the table given below from the Assessing Officer mentioned in col. 4 to the Assessing Officer mentioned in col. 5 thereof. The transfer is effected for co-ordinated investigation and assessment. . . . . This order will take immediate effect. It may be mentioned that this order has been passed on the request of the CIT, Central-II, New Delhi, who informed me, vide his letter dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT (Central-III), New Delhi, it would be necessary to centralise the case with, the case of Radico Khaitan Ltd. and other associated companies at New Delhi. (emphasis supplied) 8. It appears from the facts a notice for transfer was served for conducting "co-ordinated investigation in connection with the search undertaken against Radico Khaitan Limited and other associated cases." The notice, however, did not disclose the nature of investigation in connection with the search undertaken against Radico Khaitan Ltd. Since the notice did not disclose the nature of investigation and was bald, vague and general in nature, in such circumstances, in my view, it was not possible to file effective reply. Yet, on November 14, 2006, the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sahara Airlines Ltd. v. Director General of Income-tax (Inv.)-since reported in [2006] 286 ITR 33, relied on by the Revenue, are not applicable to the facts of the case as it appears from the facts of the said judgment that the reply of the petitioner was evasive. On the contrary in the case in hand, it is not even remotely argued on behalf of the Revenue that the petitioner had suppressed material facts or the reply was evasive.
9. Therefore, in my view, the impugned notice and the impugned order of transfer cannot be sustained and, thus, are set aside and quashed.
10. The writ petition, hence, is allowed. No order as to costs.
11. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
