2025 (7) TMI 1596

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ution of India praying the Court to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1072556157(1) passed by respondent No.2 as being without jurisdiction, void, illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also violation of Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; and Writ Petition No.19007 of 2025 is filed by the petitioners (Directors of Shreeji Foods Private Limited) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying the Court to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2024-25/1072556157(1) (for short, 'the impugned order') passed by respondent No.2 as being without jurisdiction, void, illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also violate of Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). 4. Vide the impugned order, the respondents have transferred the assessment proceedings of the petitioners outside the State, i.e., from Hyderabad i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such, it would not be proper, legal and justified to interfere with the impugned order of transfer which already stands substantially acted upon by the respondents and to be interdicted at this juncture, and therefore prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions. 8. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on a perusal of the records, particularly taking into consideration the submissions which have been passed on either side, the facts that reveal in the course of hearing are that admittedly the impugned order of transfer is one which was passed on 27.01.2025; admittedly, the said impugned order has also been acted upon and there does not seem to be any strong ground produced before this Court by the petitioners as to why the impugned order of transfer was not promptly challenged by the petitioners if at all they were aggrieved of the proceedings at that point of time. Further, another fact which is revealed is that though the petitioners have filed their formal objection in respect of the transfer being made, they did not pursue it any further and permitted the assessment proceedings to conclude at the transferred place, i.e., Delhi. Another aspect which needs ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12. In the instant case, admittedly an opportunity of hearing was given to which the petitioners have responded to. Thus, the first objection of the petitioners assailing the impugned order does not find force and the same is negated. 13. As regards the Officer proposing and the Officer accepting the proposal of transfer being of different rank, it would be relevant at this juncture to take note of the provisions of Sections 127(2) and 127(2)(a), both of which for ready reference is being reproduced as under, viz., "127(2) -Where the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom the case is to be transferred and the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers to whom the case is to be transferred are not subordinate to the same Director General or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner - (a) Where the Directors General or Chief Commissioners or Commissioners to whom such Assessing Officers are subordinate are in agreement, then the Director General or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner from whose jurisdiction the case is to be transferred may, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to be transferred to Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-20, New Delhi where all other cases of the group are centralized. Hence, the objection of the assessee is baseless and leads to the fact that it is afterthought of the assessee and nothing else." 16. From the aforesaid given factual matrix of the case, we can conveniently reach to the conclusion that for the reasons stated in the preceding paragraphs and because of certain incriminating materials found by the authorities at Delhi in the course of search and seizure operations conducted under Section 132 against one of the industries at Delhi, some incriminating information was found so far as the petitioners were concerned; and therefore, for the purpose of a coordinated investigation and also for better administrative convenience strictly in accordance with the guidelines and circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes from time to time, it was decided to transfer the assessment proceedings pertaining to the petitioners to the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, New Delhi. 17. In the matter of The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Union of India & Ram Charan Agarwal W.P.A.No.33 ....