Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2009 (1) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , 2008, and September 8, 2008, were considered. 2. It has been submitted that in the order impugned the name of the petitioner M/s. Singhal Enterprises (P.) Ltd., appears against serial No. 1 in the schedule of cases transferred. The said order was also challenged by Simple Viniyog Private Limited, whose name appears against serial No. 2, by filing a writ petition being W. P. No. 1712 of 2008, Simple Viniyog Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 313 ITR 336. The writ petitioner being W. P. No. 1712 of 2008 was heard and by judgment and order dated November 20, 2008, the order of transfer was quashed. Submission has been made that as the facts are similar and the case of the petitioner is covered by the said judgment and order dated November 20, 2008, an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ranchi, that the cases named in column (2) of the schedule below be centralized for the purpose of co-ordinated investigation with the Assessing Officer mentioned in column 6 of the schedule below. 2. In the interest of natural justice and in pursuance of requirements of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 127, the assessees were provided an opportunity to be heard in the matter of the proposed transfer, by issue of notice dated May 26, 2008. 3. Each of the assessees raised objections against the transfer, on the grounds that neither the directors nor accountants or auditors had any business connection or infrastructure at Ranchi to attend to proceedings of block assessment at offices of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessee to choose the office or officer with whom their case should be centralized. Since the assessees at Serial Nos. 3 and 4 have not filed any reply, it is presumed that they have no justification to support their objections to the proposed transfer of their cases. 6. Consequently, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me by sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and all other powers enabling me in this behalf, I the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-I, Kolkata, do hereby transfer the case named in column (2) of the schedule below, from the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer named in column (5) to the Assessing Officer named in column (6) of the said schedule. Schedule of cases transferred Sl. No. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere filed and as filing of objection is not an empty formality, it was incumbent upon the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-I, respondent No. 1, to deal with the objections. In paragraph 7 of the judgment in Mahabir Prasad, AIR 1970 SC 1302, relied on by the learned advocate for the respondent, the law laid down is as under (page 1304): "Opportunity to a party interested in the dispute to present his case on questions of law as well as fact, ascertainment of facts from materials before the Tribunal after disclosing the materials to the party against whom it is intended to use them, and adjudication by a reasoned judgment upon a finding of the facts in controversy and application of the law to the facts found, are attributes of even a qua .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... case, though it appears from paragraph 2 of the order under challenge that the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard, the order is silent as to whether the assessee, pursuant to the notice of hearing, had appeared. Therefore, in my view, the order is squarely covered by the judgment and order in Simple Viniyog [2009] 313 ITR 336 (Cal) passed on November 21, 2008. Moreover, the law laid down in Mahabir Prasad, AIR 1970 SC 1302, though relied on by the respondents, supports the case of the petitioner. Since the objections dated June 11, 2008, and September 8, 2008, were not considered the principles of law laid down in Rajesh Mahajan [2002] 257 ITR 577 (P&H) are also applicable to the facts of the case. Hence, the order impugned pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates