9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , cannot be done. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. Hence, the order of transfer dated January 19, 2007, is set aside and quashed. Consequential proceedings are also quashed. The application is also disposed of accordingly X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Reliance has been placed on the judgment in W. P. No.1657 of 2006, Kumar Kumar and Brothers v. Union of India reported in [2007] 290 ITR 310 (Cal) ; [2007] 1 CHN 877 in support of his submission. 4. Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, supporting the order dated January 19, 2007, has submitted that a search was conducted in one of the organisations in Mumbai. After search, in exercise of the powers conferred by the notification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, regarding centralisation of search cases, appearing at page 31 of the affidavit-in-opposition, the files of the petitioners were transferred. By the said notification an exception has been carved out and since centralisation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. Name and address of the assessee P.A. No. From To 1 2 3 4 5 1. Anand Kumar Arya ADKPA8359 11 ITO, Ward-37(3) Kolkata ACIT, Central Circle,17, Mumbai 2. ........... ......... .......... .......... 3. Sudarshan Kumar Arya ADLPA4430 A ITO, Ward-37(4) Kolkata ACIT, Central Circle,17, Mumbai 4. ............ .......... .......... ........... 5. ............ .......... .......... ........... This order will take immediate effect. Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-XIII, Kolkata." (emphasis supplied) 6. I find that the order of transfer of the files of the petitioners was passed for "administrative convenience". Admittedly, prior to the order of transfer no notice to show cause was issued. No opportunity o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ", evident from the letter dated April 7, 2006, issued by the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Inv.) Unit-VII (2), Mumbai, (pages 26-28 of the affidavit-in-opposition), has been set at naught by the order dated March 13, 2008, issued by the Chairman, Income-tax Settlement Commission (page 20 of the application being G.A. No. 507 of 2009) directing transfer of the files of the petitioners from Additional Bench Mumbai to Additional Bench Kolkata. Besides, since it is evident from pages 14, 15 and 16 of the said application, ETO of which the petitioners are the partners, is still assessed at Kolkata, the argument that the transfer is for centralisation is without merit. 7. So far as the judgment in Tilok Chand, AIR 1970 SC 898, relied on by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
