TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 430
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng given to you before CIT, Delhi-XVI, New Delhi. If you have any objection for the proposed transfer you are requested to bring all evidences before CIT, Delhi-XVI, New Delhi, in support of your claim on 18th Oct. 2013 at 12.30 P.M. in Room No.313 D-Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi. In case your reply/submission is not received in this office by 17-10-2013, it will be presumed that you have no objection if your case is centralized with the Commissioner of Income tax (Central Circle), Faridabad." 3. At this stage, it is important to note the background in which this show-cause notice was issued. The show cause notice pertains to the centralization of the petitioner's case with the CIT, Faridabad, along with the group of cases concerning the Eldeco Group of Companies. The petitioner is the Managing Director of Xander Advisors Pvt. Ltd. ("XAPL"), a company incorporated in India, with its registered offices in Delhi. XAPL are engaged as advisors by Xander Investment Management, Mauritius, which in turn renders advisory services to Xander Investment Holding Limited III ("XIH III") and Xander Investment Holding Limited IV ("XIH IV"), ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntralization of Eldeco Group of Cases issued vide letter no. 1101 dated 27/06/2013, wherein five cases from the CIT XVI Charge were proposed to be centralized, it was found that some more cases of the family members of the Directors or their HUFs should also be centralized as they lead to some relevant information of the assessment in the main entity. XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX 2. As per the requirements of section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an opportunity of being heard was provided to Sh. Rohan Sikri and Sh. Vishal Kumar to file their reply if they had any objection to the proposed transfer. No reply was received from Sh. Rohan Sikri. In the absence of any reply from Sh. Rohan Sikri, it is construed that he has no objection to his case getting centralized with DCIT/ACIT Central Circle Noida. Sh. Vishal Kumar filed a reply dated 17/10/2013. The main contentions made by Vishal Kumar against the proposed transfer were that he was MD in M/s. Xander Advisors India Pvt. Ltd. which had registered office in Delhi; he drew no salary from Eldeco Group of Companies; and he was a regular assessee paying his taxes in time. Reply of Sh. Vishal Kumar has been considered and is found to have n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly been transferred from one Assessing Officer to another, but also from one State to another, the considerations must be stricter in judging whether the powers under Section 127 have been properly utilized. 7. Learned counsel urges that a mechanical order has been passed in this case, which betrays a non-application of mind. Reliance has been placed on various decisions, including Y.K. Agarwal v. CIT, 283 ITR 532 (All), PS Housing Finance (P) Limited v. UOI, 290 ITR 316, Rajesh Mahajan v. CIT,2002 ( 257) ITR 577, Saptagiri Enterprises v. CIT and Ors., (1991) 189 ITR 705 (AP), and Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, 365 ITR 502, for the proposition that merely mentioning that the transfer is required for the purpose of co-ordinated investigation or administrative convenience is insufficient to justify an order under Section 127. Furthermore, learned counsel argues that the impugned order is totally silent on the nature of the proposed investigation sought to be conducted, since the petitioner is only a salaried employee, who does not have any links with the Eldeco Group. Furthermore, learned counsel argues that the impugned order proceeds on a factually incorrect premise that some of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer becomes important. Indeed, it is not in the Court's domain to secondguess the Revenue's reasoning, or sit in appeal. Rather, the conspectus of facts in this case clearly points towards some nexus between the Eldeco Group and the petitioner, which satisfied the scrutiny of this Court in its limited writ jurisdiction under Article 226. 9. The Court also takes notice of the fact that an "order of transfer is passed for the purpose of assessment of income. It serves a larger purpose. Such an order has to be passed in public interest." (see, KP Mohammed Salim v. CIT, (2008) 11 SCC 573). The purpose of a Section 127 transfer is not to subject the petitioner to any tax liability, or even undergo any other obligation (onerous or otherwise), but rather, only to direct that the regular assessment (as is carried out in the usual course of events) will be conducted by an AO other than the jurisdictional AO in order to ensure coordinated investigation. Importantly, in this case, the Revenue does not rely on the mere plea or assertion of coordinated investigation. Rather, the facts, as discussed above, provide a context of the need for such a coordinate investigation, given the various lim....