Valid transfer of income-tax assessment files upheld, and place-of-assessment objections barred when raised for the first time on appeal.

Transfer of pending assessment files was treated as valid under the income-tax framework where returns had been filed before the 1961 Act commenced, so the 1922 Act governed the assessments; the later order under section 127 was read as a composite transfer order, and omission to cite section 5(7A) of the 1922 Act was treated as an irregularity, leaving the Ranchi officer with jurisdiction. An objection to the place of assessment could not be raised for the first time in appeal, because section 64(3) confined such challenges to the prescribed administrative stage. The transfer and assessments were upheld, and the appellate challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the files for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 were legally transferred to the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Ranchi, and whether that officer had jurisdiction to make the assessments; (ii) Whether an objection as to the place of assessment could be raised for the first time before the appellate authority.

Issue (i): Whether the files for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 were legally transferred to the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Ranchi, and whether that officer had jurisdiction to make the assessments.

Analysis: The returns for the relevant years had been filed before the commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961, so the assessments were governed by the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, though the transfer order was later expressed under section 127 of the 1961 Act. The order was read as a composite transfer order covering pending and future proceedings under both enactments, and the omission to mention section 5(7A) of the 1922 Act was treated as a mere irregularity. The transfer order also disclosed reasons in the interest of proper assessment and revenue.

Conclusion: The transfer was held to be valid, and the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Ranchi, was held to have jurisdiction to act for the assessment years in question, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether an objection as to the place of assessment could be raised for the first time before the appellate authority.

Analysis: The scheme of section 64(3) of the 1922 Act confined questions about the place of assessment to the prescribed administrative stage and did not provide for such an objection to be entertained in appeal. The appellate authorities were concerned with the legality and propriety of the assessment order and not with a fresh challenge to the place of assessment when no objection had been taken before the assessing officer.

Conclusion: The objection as to the place of assessment was held to be unavailable at the appellate stage, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in favour of the department on both questions, upholding the transfer and the assessments made by the officer at Ranchi and denying the assessee a new appellate challenge on the place of assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: A transfer order affecting pending assessment proceedings under the repealed and successor income-tax enactments may be treated as validly covering both where the statutory context supports that construction, and an objection to the place of assessment cannot be raised for the first time in appeal if not taken before the assessing officer.

---