TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 920X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue, totally vague and evasive replies have been given to paragraph No.2 of the written statement and there is no categoric denial to the averment that the petitioners were connected in some manner to the Augusta Westland case and to the Gautam Khaitan Group of companies. In our considered opinion, because of the possibility of the involvement of the assessee in a scam having international ramifications it may not have been possible for the Revenue department to have expressed or given more reasons than what were given in the impugned order and, in the facts of the present case this would be in the larger public interest; particularly when we find that the reasons were well knows to the petitioners. - CWP-15200-2019 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 19-11-2019 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI AND HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Mr. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.S. Kanda, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed challenging the order Annexure P-7 whereby the assessment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 127(1). We are unable to accept this submission. The reason for recording of reasons in the order and making these reasons known to the assessee is to enable an opportunity to the assessee to approach the High Court under its writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution or even this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution in an appropriate case for challenging the order, inter alia, either on the ground that it is based on irrelevant and extraneous condonations Whether such a writ or special leave application ultimately fails is not relevant for a decision of the question. In M/s Energetic Investment's case (supra) the issue was whether the notice was ever served upon the assessee and that is why, the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court directed the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to give a hearing to that assessee and pass a fresh order. Between these two cases there is a host of judgments which reiterate what the Supreme Court said in the Ajanta case (supra). Apart from that, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has also drawn the attention of the Court to the subsequent circulars issued by R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artment in clear terms lists the nexus between the petitioners and the Gautam Khaitan Group. Learned counsel for the Revenue has further pointed out that a replication has been filed by the petitioners to the said reply wherein evasive replies have been given to the pleas raised in the written statement and in fact, the petitioners have not been able to make any categoric assertion and denial of being connected with the Augusta Westland and Gautam Khaitan Group of companies. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the Revenue that the Augusta Westland case has international ramifications and various proceedings are pending in different Courts including Criminal Courts, before Enforcement Directorate and there are some portions which are still being investigated by CBI. She has also handed over a questionnaire in a sealed cover which was put to the Chairman-cum- Managing Director of petitioner No.1 during the survey proceedings apart from other corroborative material which is also handed over to us in a sealed cover. She has also relied upon the Circular No. F. No.299/107/2013-IT (Inv.III)/1568 Annexure R-4 wherein in paragraph No. 3 i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment. The legal position is crystal clear and settled by a catena of the decisions of this Court and the apex court on this issue. this Court cannot go into the sufficiency of the reasons : There is no pleading that the impugned order of transfer is due to bias or mala fide or otherwise arbitrary . The reasons indicated in the impugned order cannot be said to be irrelevant. Reference may be made to the decision of this Court in the case of Madhav Sharan Agrawal v. CIT. We may refer to our judgment rendered today, i.e., February 23, 2006 in Writ Petition No. 355 of 2005 : Trimurti Fragrances P. Ltd v. CIT [2006] 283 ITR 547, wherein we had an occasion to deal with this aspect in detail. She has also relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in Charanpal Singh versus CIT Bathinda reported as 307 ITR 132. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we are of the considered opinion that the present petition is devoid of any merit. In the present case, when the survey was conducted on 3.8.2016 a detailed questionnaire was put to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the petitioner, and the replies he had given to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
