2008 (12) TMI 42 - HC - Income Tax

Transfer of case of petitioner by Commissioner petitioners submitted detailed representations before the said Commissioner of Income-tax containing several objections to the proposal for transferring their cases - CIT s transfer order does not disclose proper application of mind to the objections - order of transfer under section 127(2) ought to disclose proper application of mind to the objections which the assessee may have raised order of transfer is set aside

Summary

In the High Court judgment delivered by BADAR DURREZ AHMED AND RAJIV SHAKDHER JJ., a batch of writ petitions challenged an order from the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-I, transferring cases to the Assessing Officer at Meerut under section 127(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioners objected to the transfer, citing reasons such as their main office being in Delhi, directors residing in Delhi or Noida, and business activities located in Noida. The impugned order did not address these objections and only mentioned the transfer was for administrative convenience and coordinated investigation. The court referred to a previous case, Nitin Developers and Const v. CIT, where it was established that orders under section 127(2) must consider objections raised by the assessee. Consequently, the court set aside the order and allowed the Commissioner of Income Tax (Delhi)-I, New Delhi to issue a new order under section 127(2) after giving the petitioners a further opportunity to be heard. The new order must address any objections raised by the petitioners. The writ petitions were disposed of accordingly. The judgment was signed by the Court and delivered by the Court Master.