Court partially sets aside transfer order under Income-tax Act, emphasizes non-arbitrary nature of decisions.

The Court partially set aside the transfer order, excluding assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2010-11, directing the revenue to provide the assessee with a hearing opportunity before transferring the case. Despite the petitioner's objections to the subsequent transfer order, the Court found no merit in their contentions, emphasizing the non-arbitrary nature of transfer decisions under Section 127 of the Income-tax Act. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, stating there was no valid reason to entertain it, and no costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order transferring case under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to Transfer Order
- The petitioner challenged the transfer order dated 5 January 2012, which transferred the case from Mumbai to Delhi.
- The Court held that granting a personal hearing was necessary before passing an order under Section 127(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
- The transfer order dated 5 January 2012 was partially set aside, excluding the assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2010-11.
- The revenue was directed to provide an opportunity for the assessee to be heard before transferring the case.

Issue 2: Impugned Order dated 7 March 2013
- The impugned order dated 7 March 2013 transferred the petitioner's case to Delhi for coordinated investigation and assessment.
- The petitioner raised objections to the transfer, but the Commissioner did not accept them.
- The petitioner contended that the order was beyond the show cause notice and breached natural justice.

Issue 3: Contentions by Petitioner
- The petitioner argued that the order lacked reasons and did not address objections raised.
- The transfer was questioned for lacking reasons justifying coordinated investigation.
- The petitioner claimed the order was unsustainable due to the absence of evidence of an agreement between tax commissioners.

Issue 4: Court's Analysis
- The Court examined the exercise of transferring cases under Section 127 of the Act.
- The discretion to transfer a case should not be arbitrary, perverse, or malafide.
- The Court emphasized that an assessee cannot choose their Assessing Officer.
- The reasons for transfer must indicate a due application of mind and not be malafide or arbitrary.

Conclusion:
- The Court found no merit in the petitioner's objections.
- The Court dismissed the petition, stating there was no reason to entertain it.
- The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

---