9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 167 - HC - Income TaxTransfer of cases - application of mind - Held that - The power exercised by the authority under Section 127 of the Act is thoroughly uncalled for in the absence of any linkage material of any nature. In view of facts prevailing on record, it clearly transpires that the authority has not acted in the spirit in which it has to act while dealing with an issue of transfer. By merely reproducing and taking out the words from the statutory provisions, the order cannot be said to be passed upon application of mind and therefore, it appears to the Court that the orders challenged in these petitions deserve to be set aside. For the reasons recorded above, the present petitions are allowed. The orders impugned dated 6.1.2016 are hereby quashed and set aside in each petition. The cases of the petitioner of SCA No.4473 of 2016 is ordered to be transferred back from the office of DCIT,Central Circle-3, Surat to ITO, Ward No.3(3)(9), Ahmedabad, (ii) the petitioner of SCA No.4474 of 2016 is ordered to be transferred back from the office of DCIT,Central Circle-3, Surat to ITO, Ward No.3(2)(2), Ahmedabad and (iii) petitioner of SCA No.4475 of 2016 is ordered to be transferred back from the office of DCIT,Central Circle-3, Surat to ITO, Ward No.3(3)(4), Ahmedabad and the respondent No.1 authority is directed to proceed with the same from the stage from where it may have presently reached. Rule made absolute in each matter.
Issues Involved:
1. Legality and validity of the order dated 6.1.2016 under Section 127(2) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Justification for transferring the petitioner's case from Ahmedabad to Surat. 3. Compliance with principles of natural justice. 4. Adequacy of material linking the petitioner to M/s. HVK International Group, Surat. 5. Application of mind by the authority in passing the transfer order. Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality and Validity of the Order Dated 6.1.2016: The petitioner challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 6.1.2016, which transferred her case from Ahmedabad to Surat under Section 127(2) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The transfer was purportedly for coordinated investigation and assessment. The court found that the order lacked cogent reasons and failed to demonstrate an application of mind by the authority. The order merely cited "coordinated investigation and assessment" without substantial justification, making it legally unsustainable. 2. Justification for Transferring the Petitioner's Case: The petitioner argued that there was no justifiable reason for transferring her case as she had no connection with M/s. HVK International Group, Surat. The court noted that the petitioner had provided a detailed reply and evidence, including an affidavit from Mr. Sanjay Dhanak, clarifying no financial or business transactions with the said group. The court found no material evidence linking the petitioner to M/s. HVK International Group, Surat, thus deeming the transfer unjustified. 3. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice: The petitioner contended that the transfer order violated principles of natural justice as she was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The court emphasized that natural justice requires not only a reasonable opportunity to be heard but also the provision of reasons for decisions. The court found that the authority had failed to consider the petitioner's submissions and did not provide adequate reasons for the transfer, thus violating principles of natural justice. 4. Adequacy of Material Linking the Petitioner to M/s. HVK International Group, Surat: The petitioner asserted that there was no material linking her to M/s. HVK International Group, Surat. The court examined the statements and evidence on record and found no incriminating material connecting the petitioner with the said group. The court noted that the only connection was the purchase of a flat by the petitioner's husband from Mr. Sanjay Dhanak, which was insufficient to establish any linkage. The court concluded that the transfer was based on presumptions rather than concrete evidence. 5. Application of Mind by the Authority: The court scrutinized the order dated 6.1.2016 and found that it lacked detailed reasoning and failed to address the petitioner's contentions. The court observed that the authority had not demonstrated an application of mind or subjective satisfaction before passing the transfer order. The court held that the order was vitiated by non-application of mind and was not in consonance with the statutory requirements under Section 127 of the Income-Tax Act. Conclusion: The court concluded that the transfer orders dated 6.1.2016 were not justified, lacked adequate reasoning, and violated principles of natural justice. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned orders, directing the cases to be transferred back to their original jurisdiction in Ahmedabad. The court allowed the petitions and made the rule absolute in each matter.
|
