Assessee cannot challenge transfer order in assessment; timely objection crucial; dismiss appeal if jurisdiction not raised.

The Court held that the assessee cannot challenge the transfer order under section 127 in assessment proceedings as the scope is limited to income and tax liability. Failure to raise jurisdictional objection before the Assessing Officer precludes raising it on appeal. The Court emphasized challenging transfer orders through administrative or legal channels if aggrieved. As the assessee did not timely object, no substantial question of law was found, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The appeal involves the compliance of section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the jurisdiction to decide the case of the appellant.

Comprehensive Details:
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 2,44,243 to the income of the assessee, which was contested by the assessee claiming it was from agricultural income. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal but upheld an addition of Rs. 1 lakh. The Tribunal then remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer.

The assessee also challenged the order of transfer of jurisdiction under section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, stating that it rendered the reassessment proceedings void. The Tribunal, referring to a previous order, noted that the assessee had knowledge of the transfer order but did not challenge it at the appropriate forum.

The main issue was whether the assessee could challenge the transfer order under section 127 in the assessment proceedings. The Court clarified that the scope of assessment proceedings is limited to determining income and tax liability, and the validity of a transfer order cannot be questioned in such proceedings. If aggrieved, the assessee should challenge the order separately through administrative channels or legal remedies.

Referring to legal precedents, the Court emphasized that if there is an abuse of power in a transfer order, appropriate action can be taken, but the provision itself is not void. The Court highlighted that the situation of a transfer order is different from that of reopening an assessment under section 34, where the assessee has the opportunity to contest the reasons for reopening.

Ultimately, the Court held that since the assessee did not raise the jurisdictional objection in a timely manner before the Assessing Officer, it cannot be raised on appeal. Consequently, the Court found no substantial question of law and dismissed the appeal.

---