9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue authorities in doing an effective and coordinate investigation and assessment. We have absolutely no doubt in our mind that the reasons were assigned by the authorities as it was required under Section 127 of the Act. Service of the notice - It is not a case where notice was sent at a wrong address. The notice was sent at an address of the company at Kerala which has also been received by the appellants/petitioners although they do not categorically refute that they did not receive the said notice. It is therefore sufficient compliance under Rule 127 as the notice was sent at the registered office of the company. Revenue department has categorically stated that the appellants/petitioners had received the notice dated 23.05.2018 on 26.06.2018, a fact which has been reiterated over and again by the Revenue department, and has not been negated by the appellants/ petitioners. All the same, since no response was filed before the Revenue authorities, another notice was sent on 26.06.2018. Unlike the first time, this time it came with an endorsement of the postal authority that it is unclaimed . A presumption can very well be drawn here that when the first notice was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 33(K)/2019. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 36(K)/2019 and the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 39(K)/2019 are the wife and the daughter respectively of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 33(K)/2019. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 37(K)/2019 is a partnership firm, which is represented by one of its partners, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 35(K)/2019. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 38(K) is a private limited company, which is represented by one of its Directors, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 36(K)/2019. All the petitioners are the members of one family. 3. Presently, we have before us five writ appeals, arsing out of the order dated 25.09.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 33(K)/2019, WP(C) 34(K)/2019, WP(C) 35(K)/2019, WP(C) 36(K)/2019, WP(C) 37(K)/2019, WP(C) 38(K)/2019 and WP(C) 39(K)/2019. 4. Sri M.K. Rajendran Pillai is the promoter of M/s Sreevalsam Group. Sri Arun Raj Pillai is the appellant in WA 44/2020 and Sri Varun Raj Pillai is the appellant in WA 39/2020. W.P.(C) No. 36 (K)/2019 was filed by Smti. Valsala Raj Pillai, who is the wife of Sri M.K. Rajendran Pillai and the appellant in WA 40/2020. WA 41/2020 has been filed by Smt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this particular group was located in Kerala as well as in Nagaland and purely for administrative exigencies and in order to have a better control, powers under Section 127 of the Act were exercised by the Revenue authorities. Section 127 of the Act gives power to transfer a case from one jurisdictional assessing authority to another. Section 127 of the Act reads as under: 127. Power to transfer cases. (1). The Principal Director General or Director General or Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner 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, transfer any case from one or more Assessing Officers subordinate to him (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) also subordinate to him. 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 s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the date of such order or direction in respect of any year. 7. A notice under Section 127 was given to the petitioners/writ appellants on 07.12.2017 by the Revenue authorities situated in Jorhat, Assam. The writ appellants/ petitioners raised objections to the said proposed transfer on 25.01.2018 and ultimately the Revenue authority vide order dated 27.02.2018 passed an order transferring the case of the petitioner from one assessing authority to another, i.e. from Dimapur, Nagaland to Kollam, Kerala. This order was put to challenge in WP(C) No.42(K) of 2018 and other connected writ petitions by all the assessees/petitioners including the present petitioners, who are all family members, before the learned Single Judge at Kohima Bench of Gauhati High Court. The main argument of the petitioners before the learned Single Judge was that the two necessary ingredients of Section 127 of the Act are: firstly, a proper notice has to be given to an assessee before actually passing the transfer order and secondly, such an order must assign reasons for the transfer. Since no reason has been assigned either in the notice or in the order, the order is bad and is liable to be set aside. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the company which has registered office at Kerala, where notice dated 23.05.2018 was served. In fact, when nobody made representation before the concerned authority which has passed the transfer order, another notice was sent which was returned with a remark Addressee unclaimed - return to sender . In fact, the reasons which have been assigned for transfer of the case are very relevant. The reasons are contained in the notice dated 23.05.2018 itself which reads as under: In the course of the search operation it was gathered that you joined the Nagaland Police in 1973, retired in 2007, and were retained as Consultant. It is learnt that your consultancy services were terminated in the wake of the search. It was also found that huge funds, running into several crores of rupees were, at your instance and direction, transferred from some business entities in Nagaland, which are run on paper by Nagaland residents, to various bank accounts of businesses in Kerala which are controlled by your family members. It has been brought out in the search findings that your own and your family members financial interests are based, and are controlled and managed, in Kerala state, particula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artners), - Krishna Money Chits Pvt Ltd, Sreevalsam Building, MC Road, Pandalam, Pathanamthitta District, Kerala (Varun Raj and Arun Raj are Directors), - Allebasi Builders Developers Pvt Ltd, Shelter, Attingal, LMS Junction, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala (Valsala Raj, Arun Raj and G T Rengma are Directors), - Vrindavan Builders Pvt Ltd, c/o M/s Auto Spares, Circular Road, Near Holy Cross, Dimapur, Nagaland (Valsala Raj, Varun Raj, Arun Raj and Tep Rengma are Directors), - Rajavalsam Fuels, a proprietorship of Smt. Valsala Raj, is based in Pandalam, Pathanamthitta district. Over several years, you have been directing the transfer of huge sums of money from several bank accounts in Nagaland to your family s businesses and to your family members who are all based in Pathnamthitta district of Kerala, making investments in your own name and in the names of your family members in the said businesses and also in several immovable properties in Kerala and elsewhere. Whenever funds were transferred to third parties, the same was ultimately transferred to an associate or concern in which you or your family members had controlling interest. It is manifest from the mod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Their entire business interest is in Kerala. In fact, it is not a case where notice was sent at a wrong address. The notice was sent at an address of the company at Kerala which has also been received by the appellants/petitioners although they do not categorically refute that they did not receive the said notice. It is therefore sufficient compliance under Rule 127 as the notice was sent at the registered office of the company. The Revenue department has categorically stated that the appellants/petitioners had received the notice dated 23.05.2018 on 26.06.2018, a fact which has been reiterated over and again by the Revenue department, and has not been negated by the appellants/ petitioners. All the same, since no response was filed before the Revenue authorities, another notice was sent on 26.06.2018. Unlike the first time, this time it came with an endorsement of the postal authority that it is unclaimed . A presumption can very well be drawn here that when the first notice was received at the same address, how can the second notice remain unclaimed and therefore, this plea of the petitioners/appellants that the second notice was never received by them has been rightly reject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for electronic mail or electronic mail message) to which a notice or summons or requisition or order or any other communication under the Act (hereafter in this rule referred to as communication ) may be delivered or transmitted shall be as per sub-rule (2). (2) The addresses referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be- (a) for communications delivered or transmitted in the manner provided in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 282- (i) the address available in the PAN database of the addressee; or (ii) the address available in the income-tax return to which the communication relates; or (iii) the address available in the last income-tax return furnished by the addressee; or (iv) in the case of addressee being a company, address of registered office as available on the website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs: Provided that the communication shall not be delivered or transmitted to the address mentioned in item (i) to (iv) where the addressee furnishes in writing any other address for the purposes of communication to the income-tax authority or any person authorised by such authority issuing the communication. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
