Court quashes transfer order under Income Tax Act due to lack of communication and arbitrary decision-making.

The Court set aside and quashed the order transferring jurisdiction from Kolkata to New Delhi under the Income Tax Act, 1961. It found the transfer decision to be arbitrary and lacking proper communication and consideration of the petitioner's objections. The Court held that the order was passed perfunctorily, without addressing the petitioner's submissions adequately. The Revenue was allowed to initiate the process afresh, providing the petitioner with a proper opportunity to present its case. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs, and all parties were directed to act as per the operative part of the order.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to proposal for transfer of jurisdiction from Kolkata to New Delhi under Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The case involved a challenge to a proposal dated 27th October, 2009, issued by the Income Tax Officer, Technical-2, Kolkata, on behalf of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-II, to transfer the jurisdiction of a company's case from DCIT, Circle-6, Kolkata to ACIT, Central Circle-I, New Delhi. The petitioner objected to this transfer, arguing that the main business operations were in Kolkata, not New Delhi, and that all shareholders were situated in Kolkata. The petitioner contended that the transfer was unjustified and should be revoked.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the Department had changed its case from the initial proposal to the final order, indicating that the transfer decision was arbitrary and unsupported. On the other hand, the respondents' counsel defended the order, stating that the transfer was necessary for coordinated investigation purposes and was justified after due process of inviting objections and holding a hearing.

The Court noted that no affidavits were filed by the Revenue, leading to a presumption that the assertions in the writ petition were correct. The Court found that the order of transfer was based on grounds different from those initially proposed, indicating a lack of proper communication and consideration of the petitioner's objections. The Court held that the order was passed perfunctorily, without adequately addressing the petitioner's submissions.

Consequently, the Court set aside and quashed the order dated 6th November, 2009, passed under section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-II. The Court allowed the Revenue to initiate the process afresh, providing the petitioner with a proper opportunity to present its case. The writ petition was allowed, with no order as to costs, and all parties were directed to act as per the operative part of the order.

---