Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Validity of transfer of assessment cases under section 127 of the Income-tax Act where both assessing officers were situated in the same building and city, and whether reasons or prior hearing were required to be communicated to the assessee.
Analysis: The transfer fell within section 127(3), which creates an exception to the ordinary requirement of opportunity of hearing and recording of reasons under section 127(1) when the transfer is between assessing officers whose offices are situated in the same city, locality or place. In such a case, the transfer is an administrative measure for departmental convenience, and the absence of prior hearing or communication of reasons does not invalidate the order. The court relied on the controlling interpretation that in transfers of this nature neither notice nor recorded reasons are necessary.
Conclusion: The transfer order was valid and the challenge to it failed.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was held to be without merit and was dismissed with costs, the impugned transfer and consequential assessment orders being upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: Where assessment cases are transferred between assessing officers located in the same city, locality or place, section 127(3) dispenses with the requirement of prior hearing and also makes recording or communication of reasons unnecessary, the transfer being an administrative order.