9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t case as it was respondent No.5 alone, who had the authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) r/w Section 142 (1) of the Act. A valuable right of assessee is clearly involved in the matter, when he objected to jurisdiction of the assessing officer and transfer of his case, which obviously could not have been adjudicated upon without affording an opportunity of hearing and disclosing to him the reasons for not accepting his point of view. Accordingly, we find merit in both the appeal as well as writ petition. Consequently, the impugned order(s) framing the best judgment assessment for the respective assessment years are quashed and set aside. However, this judgment shall not prevent the respondents for initiating proceedings afresh by either resorting to Section 127 of the Act or by initiating or continuing the proceedings through respondent No.4. - The Hon ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge And The Hon ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge For the Appellant/petitioner : In person For the Respondents: Mr. Balram Sharma, Dy. SGI with Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1 in CWP No.6575 of 2014. Mr. Ishan Kashyap, Advocate for respondent in ITA No.23 of 2017 and for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax, New Delhi, respondent No.5 i.e. Income Tax Officer, Barotiwala road, Baddi had no authority to issue notice under Section 143(2) read with Section 142 (1) of the Act and finalize the assessment of the appellant/petitioner without transferring his case file under Section 127 of the Act. 8. Respondents No. 1, 2 and 5 have filed a common reply to the writ petition, wherein it has been averred that the matter in issue arose for the first time as far back as on 14.09.2010 when notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the petitioner by Income Tax Officer, Solan and thereafter, the best judgment assessment was framed for that year on 27.12.2011. It is averred that the appellant/petitioner though had already availed alternate remedy of filing statutory appeals against the assessment orders for the assessment year 2009-10 and order of the CIT Appeals in respect of that year, hence, the appellant/petitioner cannot seek the same relief in respect of the present assessment year by filing the writ petition. 9. It is further averred that the best judgment assessment orders under Section 144 of the Act have been passed in respect of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t No.4 for scrutiny for the assessment year 2003-04. 15. Lastly, it has been averred that the case of the appellant/petitioner could not have been picked up for scrutiny assessment by any officer at Delhi as his PAN belonged to I.T.O., Baddi jurisdiction. The PAN of the assessee was never migrated from Himachal Pradesh to Delhi as the assessee since inception was allotted PAN with ITO Parwanoo as per the territorial jurisdiction. Due to this, there was no reason to issue any notice under Section 127 of the Act to transfer the jurisdiction. 16. The appellant/petitioner has filed rejoinder to the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.4 and has reiterated that the income tax record of the appellant/petitioner was originally with respondent No.4, which has been transferred to respondent No.5 unilaterally without first putting the notice to the appellant/petitioner under Section 127 of the Act. 17. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record. 18. The appellant/petitioner had been filing his income tax returns with respondent No.4 ever since the date of inception. The assessment was finalized by respondent No.4 even for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, authorise in this behalf. (3) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be deemed to require any such opportunity to be given where the transfer is from any Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) and the offices of all such officers are situated in the same city, locality or place. (4) The transfer of a case under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) may be made at any stage of the proceedings, and shall not render necessary the re-issue of any notice already issued by the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom the case is transferred.] Explanation. In section 120 and this section, the word case , in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued thereunder, means all proceedings under this Act in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or before such date, and includes also all proceedings under this Act which may be commenced after the date of such order or direction in respect of any year. 21. The t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The reason for recording of reasons in the order and making these reasons known to the assessee is to enable an opportunity to the assessee to approach the High Court under its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution or even this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution in an appropriate case for challenging the order, inter alia, either on the ground that it is mala fide or arbitrary or that it is based on irrelevant and extraneous considerations. Whether such a writ or special leave application ultimately fails is not relevant for a decision of the question. 11. We are clearly of opinion that the requirement of recording reasons under Section 127 (1), is a mandatory direction under the law and noncommunication thereof is not saved by showing that the reasons exist in the file although not communicated to the assessee. 15. When law requires reasons to be recorded in a particular order affecting prejudicially the interests of any person, who can challenge the order in court, it ceases to be a mere administrative order and the vice of violation of the principles of natural justice on account of omission to communicate the reasons is not expiated. 32. A perusal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
