Asstt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs Sai Krupa Developers, Ahmedabad on 23 August, 2024
8. With respect to this ground of appeal, the Counsel for the assessee
relied on the case of Dharamshibhai H. Patel vs. ITO in IT(SS)A No.
199/Ahd/2014, wherein the proceedings under Section 158BC of the Act were
set-aside on the ground that while transferring the case of the assessee from
one jurisdiction to another within the same city notice under Section 127 was
not issued to the assessee. Accordingly, the Counsel for the assessee submitted
that the facts of the case cited by the assessee are similar to the assessee's set
of facts. In the assessee's case, the original jurisdiction of the assessee was
with ITO, Ward-2(3), Ahmedabad and pursuant to search, the case was
centralized with Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad. The assessee's contention
before us is that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is bad in law on the
ground that the assessee did not receive any notice under Section 127 of the
Act for transferring it's case to Central Circle at Ahmedabad and the assessee
was never provided any opportunity, before transferring the case. The assessee
has also relied upon order passed by ITAT Ahmedabad in the abovementioned
case, with respect to this contention and submitted that the facts of the case
relied upon by the assessee are similar to assessee's set of facts, wherein the
case of the assessee is that the case law cited by the Counsel for the assessee
involved transfer of jurisdiction of the assessee within the State of Ahmedabad
itself.