Court sets aside transfer order, emphasizes right to be heard, remits case for reevaluation.

The court allowed the petition, setting aside the order transferring the assessment and remitting the case back to the competent authority. The petitioner's right to be heard was violated as the transfer decision was made without providing an opportunity for the petitioner to present objections. The court emphasized the importance of affording the assessee a chance to be heard as required by the law. The competent authority was directed to reevaluate the transfer while ensuring the petitioner's right to a fair hearing, with a deadline set for issuing necessary orders within four weeks.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to show cause notice, Impugned order transfer, Violation of natural justice, Opportunity of being heard, Statutory infraction, Remitting the case back to competent authority.

Challenge to Show Cause Notice:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to set aside a show cause notice dated 8.2.2021, along with challenging an order dated 23.2.2021 and a letter dated 9.4.2021 transferring the assessment from Rajkot to Varanasi under section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice cited reasons for transfer based on a search warrant issued in Lucknow and the need for centralization as per CBDT guidelines.

Violation of Natural Justice and Opportunity of Being Heard:
The petitioner objected to the transfer, stating regular compliance with tax returns, residence in Rajkot, and lack of group search under section 132(1) at the assessee's location. The petitioner argued that the transfer order was passed without providing an opportunity to be heard, as the notice was not sent to the registered email address. The court found that the petitioner was deprived of the statutory right to a hearing, leading to a breach of natural justice.

Statutory Infraction and Remitting the Case:
The court noted discrepancies in the communication process, emphasizing the importance of affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard as mandated by section 127 of the Act. The impugned order transferring the assessment was set aside, and the case was remitted back to the competent authority for a fresh decision after considering the objections raised by the petitioner. The court clarified that the remand was solely based on the lack of opportunity for the petitioner to present their case.

Conclusion:
The petition was allowed, directing the competent authority to reevaluate the transfer of assessment from Rajkot to Varanasi while ensuring the petitioner's right to be heard. The court refrained from expressing any opinion on the case's merits, focusing solely on upholding principles of natural justice and statutory provisions regarding opportunity for the assessee to present their objections. The competent authority was instructed to complete the reevaluation process and issue necessary orders within four weeks from the date of the court's order.

---