9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they are actually in existence. As already given a tabulation of the number of assessees (17 in number), their present jurisdiction and the reasons for centralisation as given by the Department in an Annexure to the counter affidavit. The same discloses that the hardship that would be caused to the witnesses and the inconvenience that would be caused to the Department in dealing with these cases at Hyderabad are far more than that of the assessees. Therefore, even on the question of relative hardship, it is not possible to interfere with the impugned orders. There are four writ petitions on hand. The first petitioners on the file of the Income Tax Officer at Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. Therefore, they cannot have a grievance about the transfer of cases to Rajamahendravaram in East Godavari District, which is a neighbouring district. Similarly, the second petitioners are assessees on the file of the jurisdictional officer at Visakhapatnam. Therefore, they cannot also have a grievance about the transfer of the cases to East Godavari District, as both the districts are located in the State of Andhra Pradesh and even the contention revolving around Section 127(2)(a) will not ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransferred all the cases to Central Circle-I, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. It is against these orders that the different assessees forming part of the same group, either as companies or as individual promoters, have come up with the above writ petitions. 6. Before proceeding further, it may be useful to record that there are 8 companies, 2 firms and 7 individuals, who were subjected to search and seizure operations. The names of the assessees, their status, the present jurisdiction, the reasons for centralisation and the investigation potential of all these 17 assessees, are presented in a tabular column by the Department, which may be extracted as follows: Sl No Name & address of the assessee PAN and status Present jurisdiction Reasons for centralisation Investigation potential of the cases in view of the findings of search and suspicious nature of transactions between the said persons and the search group 1 M/s Nexus Feeds Ltd. AADCN 2786N Company ACIT, C-16(1), Hyderabad The concern is engaged in manufacture of premium quality feeds with the technical collaboration with M/s Hanaqua Tech INC, Taiwan Share Capital was introduced into the company thro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td. Beneficiary of multiple transactions in group companies and has made investments for which sources do not exist. Purshased multiple properties for which sources stand unexplained 10 M/s Risley Feeds Ltd. AAGCR 2255P Company Circle 17(2), Hyderabad A trading entity dealing with products and raw materials relating to group companies, managed in the name of KND Prasad Reddy, Satti Chandra Sekhar Reddy & Sheik Meera Mohiddin Certain Investors have admitted to have not invested in the company at all 11 M/s Reddy & Reddy Infrastructure AAOFR 5799M Firm Ward-1, Bhimavaram The concern is a partnership firm of G.Ramakrishna Redd, G.Venkata Reddy, G.Radha, G.Lakshmi Parvathy and G.Satya Prabha Executed multiple infrastructure projects and layout for which income has not been brought to tax and source of investments are not explained 12 M/s Neopride Pharmaceuticals Ltd. AAECN 3023B Company Ward 2(1), Visakhapatnam The concern has G.Srirama Reddy, G.Venkata Reddy, G.Ramakrishna Reddy and Raja Sekhara Reddy Tetali as Directors Share application money is unexplained and source of investments made is unexplained 13 M/s Golden Feeds AAIFG 3148A Firm Ward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 534 204, W.G. Dist., A.P. 3.Goluguri Rama Krishna Reddy S/o Satyanarayana Reddy, Aged 54 years, R/o Flat No.F-8, D.No.26-8-28, Sai Apartments, Balusumudi, Bhimavaram- 534 204, W.G. Dist., A.P. 4.M/s Golden Feeds, Plot No.101, Lakshmi Nagar Colony, Sheikpeta Nala, Hyderabad-500 008, Rep. by its Partner Goluguri Rama Krishna Reddy 5. M/s Reddy & Reddy Infrastructure, F-8, Shiridi Sai Apartments, Bhimavaram, W.G. Dist., A.P., Rep. by its Partner Goluguri Venkata Reddy 9352/2018 Bhimavaram, West Godavari District 1. M/s Nutrient Marine Foods Pvt. Ltd., D.No.39-11-63/2, Murali Nagar, Visakhapatnam-530 007, Rep. by its Director Goluguri Ramakrishna Reddy 2. M/s Neopride Pharmaceuticals Ltd., H.No.48-15-7, Sai Paradise Apartments, Srinagar, Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Director Goluguri Ramakrishna Reddy 13217/2018 Visakhapatnam M/s Nancy Industries Ltd., Plot No.89, Road No.71, Navanirman Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Director Goluguri Ramakrishna Reddy 13235/2018 Hyderabad 8. From the above, it is clear that out of the 10 persons/ companies who are the writ petitioners in the 4 writ petitions on hand, 5 of them are assessees on the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11. The first contention is based upon Section 127(2)(a). It reads as follows: "127. Power to transfer cases. (2) Whether the Assessing Officer of 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 Principal Director General or Director General or Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner,-- (a) where the Principal Directors General or Directors General or Principal Chief Commissioners or Chief Commissioners or Principal Commissioners or Commissioners to whom such Assessing Officers are subordinate are in agreement, then the Principal Director General or Director General or Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal 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 after recording his reasons for doing so, pass the order; (b) ……………………………&helli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessees, if the books of accounts are also in Hyderabad. 16. But in cases of this nature, the scope of judicial review of the decision taken by the competent authority to transfer cases, is confined only to the question of relative hardship. As pointed out by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Devidas v. Union of India [1993] 200 ITR 697 (Bom), the test lies in a proportionate mix of considerations of the convenience of an assessee vis-a-vis the interest of Revenue. The Court should aim at striking a balance between private and public interests. 17. The Court has essentially to test the impugned orders - (i) on the touchstone of the procedure prescribed in Section 127(1), (ii) on the touchstone of the authority on whom the power of transfer is conferred under Section 127 and (iii) on the touchstone of relative hardship. 18. In the cases on hand, we find that the procedure prescribed in Section 127(1), viz., that of giving an opportunity of being heard, has been complied with. The argument revolving around the necessity of an agreement as required by Section 127(2)(a) has also failed on factual grounds. Therefore, what is left is only the question of relative h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possible to interfere with the impugned orders. 22. As we have pointed out earlier, there are four writ petitions on hand. The petitioners in W.P.No.9352 of 2018 are all assessees on the file of the Income Tax Officer at Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. Therefore, they cannot have a grievance about the transfer of cases to Rajamahendravaram in East Godavari District, which is a neighbouring district. Similarly, the petitioners in W.P.No. 13217 of 2018 are assessees on the file of the jurisdictional officer at Visakhapatnam. Therefore, they cannot also have a grievance about the transfer of the cases to East Godavari District, as both the districts are located in the State of Andhra Pradesh and even the contention revolving around Section 127(2)(a) will not apply to their cases. Rajamahendravaram is closer to Visakhapatnam than to Hyderabad. 23. That leaves us only with the remaining two writ petitions viz., W.P.Nos.9147 and 13235 of 2018. For the reasons stated above, we find that the petitioners in these two cases also may not suffer as much hardship as the one that the witnesses may undergo and the difficulties that the Department may suffer if the transfer is not ordered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
