9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 540X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been within their rights that the notices did not contain reasons. The assessees were fully aware of the search and seizure operations and the fact that its premises in Ghaziabad too were subject to such proceedings. Having regard to all these facts, the Court hereby rejects the first contention that the ingredients of the notice did not exist when the proposal to transfer was first notified to these assessees. As far as the rationale to transfer, i.e., conduct of coordinated post search investigation and meaningful assessment goes, we are of the opinion that like in the case of first contention, the assessees have failed here as well. The kind of reasoning required by an order under Section 127 cannot be compared or likened to a q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s batch of writ petitions, the orders made by the revenue, i.e., Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 127 have been challenged. 2. The assessee, one of the petitioners, M.K. Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Director and other associates/concerns related to it was subjected to search and seizure proceedings. Some others - who are also before this Court as the petitioners were on the very same day, i.e., 28.04.2015, subjected to survey proceedings under Section 133A. 3. The revenue proposed to centralize the cases. These cases were before the Central Circle, Ghaziabad and notice was issued to each of the assessees under Section 127 (1) of the Income Tax Act. The rationale to justify the transfer was a common one - search and seizure o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjections raised by the assessee company have been considered and rejected being not tenable. A Search Seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out on 28.04.2015 by Meerut Unit of Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Kanpur in M.K. Overseas Group of cases. M/s M.K. Overseas Pvt. Ltd., is one of the group companies and was covered in the search and seizure proceedings. Authorisation u/s 133A of the Act was also issued in the name of Assessee Company. During survey proceedings various incriminating documents/loose papers and hard disk etc. Were found and impounded from the premises of M/s M.K. Overseas Pvt. Ltd., B-63-64, Site-IV, Sahibabad Industrial Area, District Ghaziabad, UP, for which coordinated investigat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Income Tax, Delhi-21, New Delhi, hereby transfer the case, the particulars of which are mentioned in Column No.2 from the Assessing Officer mentioned in Column No.4 to the Assessing Officer mentioned in Column No.5 and direct that the powers of the Assessing Officer mentioned in Column No.4 in respect of this case shall be exercised by the Assessing officer mentioned in Column No.5 functioning under PCIT mentioned in Column No.l6. This transfer is effected for the purpose of conducting coordinated post search investigation and meaningful assessments and also keeping in view the Board s instructions that the search cases should be centralized with Central Charge. 6. The petitioners urge that the failure to mention any reason in the no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubstantial prejudice at the stage when they had responded to the notice. On the merits, it was urged that the rationale, i.e., of coordinating the post investigation efforts and meaningful assessments were sufficient compliance with law. It was highlighted that the search has yielded incriminating documents and in this context coordination in regard to the block assessment with respect to post search investigation was relevant and could be efficaciously carried out at one place. It is evident from the above discussion that the petitioners grievance as articulated is twofold, firstly whether the notice was vitiated and secondly if not whether the reasons given in the transfer order are of the nature that can stand scrutiny under Section 127 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meaningful assessment goes, we are of the opinion that like in the case of first contention, the assessees have failed here as well. The kind of reasoning required by an order under Section 127 cannot be compared or likened to a quasi judicial order that has adverse consequences. One can understand if additions are made on sketchy or bare minimum reasons, they cannot be upheld. However, what is proposed by an order under Section 127 is the transfer of one or several assessments from one circle to another, to that extent inconvenience undoubtedly ensue; however, to say that this leads to grave prejudice if detailed reasoning were not given is something that the Court cannot countenance. The consequence would only be that the assessees conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
