9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent on 09.04.2024 stating a Search and Seizure action was carried out under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the petitioners' case on 12.10.2023 by Authorized Officer under the control of the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Kolkata, where they have seized number of incriminating documents and therefore, they have requested to transfer the case to the Central Circle at Kolkata. The present show cause notice was issued for the purpose of calling for reply. Subsequent to the said show cause notice, the petitioner had filed their reply on 13.04.2024. 3. The main grievance of the Petitioner is that their reply was not considered while issuing the Notification dated 17.05.2024. Further, no opportunity of personal hearing was provided. On 11.05.2024, the petitioner requested for personal hearing. However, the personal hearing was not afforded to. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the impugned Notification was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and directly in contrary to provisions of Section 127 (1) of the Income Tax Act. In terms of Section 127(1) of the Act, the 1st respondent was supposed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the date of receipt of the Show Cause Notice. After taking into consideration the petitioners' reply, the Notification was issued on 17.05.2024 under Section 127 (2) of the Income Tax Act. Before issuing the Notification, all the contentions of the petitioner was considered by the respondents and accordingly, order came to be passed. Therefore, he would submit that since the reply of the petitioner was considered, there is no violation of principles of natural justice. He would submit that it is only the transfer of case and with regard to seizure of the incriminating documents, the petitioner is well aware and those documents affect the assessment of the petitioner. Further, in the show cause notice, other details are narrated. Therefore, taking into account the seriousness of the violation and the petitioner have been carrying on business and other activities within the jurisdiction of the Kolkata Office and in the Kolkata Office, during the search, the respondents found the incriminating materials, the impugned Notification was issued. As stated above, since many materials are available, the case has been transferred. Therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1961 should not be passed to centralize your case for effective and co-ordinated investigation in your case. Accordingly, you are granted an opportunity to convey your objection in writing, if any, within 15 (Fifteen) days from the date of receipt of this letter." 09. A perusal of the said show cause notice reflects that a search and seizure action was carried out under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, on 12.10.2023 by Authorized Officer under the control of the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Kolkata. As a result of the said search and seizure in Kolkata Office, the respondents found many incriminating documents and they have come to a conclusion that the petitioners were involved in this act. Therefore, it will directly affect the assessment of the petitioner. Under these circumstances, they have issued the show cause notice and in the said show cause notice, the petitioner is requested to file a reply within a period of 15 days. The petitioner has filed their reply on 13.04.2024. Therefore, as contended by the learned Junior Standing Counsel, the respondents have provided the sufficient opportunity to file reply/objections to the Petitioner. 10. The reply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled. Taking into consideration of all these aspects, the Notification dated 17.05.2024 was issued. 13. As all the materials have been collected in Kolkata Office, the respondents, taking into consideration of the reply filed by the petitioner, have decided to transfer the petitioners' case to Central Circle, Kolkata. Of course, in the present case, since the incriminating materials were found by the Kolkata Office against the petitioner, connected with the search conducted with regard to Lottery business, it was closely linked with the assessment of the petitioner. 14. I do not find any material to show that the respondents failed either to provide an opportunity or sufficient materials to transfer the case from Coimbatore to Central Circle, Kolkata. Even if it is so, it will not alter in anyway the final decisions to transfer the cases to Calcutta Circle and it would not affect in any manner. Accordingly, Issue Nos. 1 and 2 answered. 15. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that if any search was conducted based on the place of business of an Assessee, though the Registered Office is situated at Coimbatore, it will be appropriate to make the assessment through the Circle, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
