Calcutta High Court
Parameshwar Nath Rai vs Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax And ... on 28 August, 2002
Equivalent citations: (2003)179CTR(CAL)428, [2002]258ITR591(CAL)
JUDGMENT M.H.S. Ansari, J.
1. The application is moved upon notice.
2. After having heard the oral submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties this court is of the view that instead of keeping the writ application pending on the file of this court it can be disposed of at this stage with certain appropriate directions.
3. The petitioner has questioned the order dated July 26, 2002, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Asansol, in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and thereby transferred the petitioner's case from the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3, Asansol, to the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Ranchi. The petitioner has questioned the said order of transfer of the case on several grounds.
4. The petitioner's name appears at serial No. 3 of the impugned order and the PAN/GIR number has been specified opposite his name showing the case to be transferred from Asansol to Central Circle, Ranchi. There are about fifteen assessees specified in the impugned order. Although a contention is raised that the assessees are related and being a common order, the instant writ application may be treated in respect of all the said assessees enumerated in the impugned order. I am not inclined to accept the said submission as each of the assessees has an independent cause of action in the matter. Accordingly, the writ application is confined to the petitioner whose particulars are to be found at serial No. 3 of the impugned order.
5. The impugned order was preceded by a show-cause notice dated May 30, 2002, and consequent thereupon the petitioner preferred his objection and in my view, therefore, the matter was required to be considered on the merits by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Asansol, and to be disposed of by a reasoned speaking order and not in the manner as has been purported to be done by the impugned order. The impugned order reads as an administrative order of transfer of an assessee's case from one particular circle to another.
6. In the circumstances, the impugned order to the extent the petitioner is concerned, is liable to be and is hereby quashed and set aside with liberty to the Commissioner of Income-tax, Asansol, to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law after affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and thereafter to dispose of the same by a reasoned speaking order which shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order.
7. It is hereby clarified that the representation already made by the petitioner which is at page 55 of the writ application, shall be deemed to be the representation of the petitioner against the notice dated May 30, 2002.
8. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner, if so advised, to make further representation within a period of ten days from the date hereof.
The writ application is accordingly disposed of.
9. As no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for or relied upon the averments made in the writ application are deemed not admitted.
10. Let xerox plain copies of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to learned counsel for both the parties on usual undertakings.