Date Of Order 13-11-2017 W.p.nos.36428 v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bengaluru-2, & Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017 BEFORKH, THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI W.P.Nos.36428'36433/2017 (T'IT). BETWEEN 1.M/s. Dhammanagi Developers Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Director omt. Mangala Babu Dhammanagi, Aged about 53 years | No.137, Railway Parallel Road, Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20.Bangalore-560 O20. a2M/s. Dhammanagi Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Director omt. Mangala Babu Dhammanagi, Aged about 53 years | No.137, Railway Parallel Road,Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20.Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20. 3.M/s. D & N Associates Represented by its Partner ori Anand Nadig, Aged about 51 years| No.137, Railway Parallel Road, Kumara Park West, Bangalore-560 O20. Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 2/9 4M/s. Dhammanagi & Sanu Developers Pvt. Ltd.,Represented by its Managing DirectorRepresented by its Managing Director sri Harsha B. Dhammanagi| Aged about 29 years|No.137, Railway Parallel Road,Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20.No.137, Railway Parallel Road,Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20. 5.shri. K. Purushothama Adiga| »/o Sri 8.M. AdigaAged about 38 years|No.39, Shri GurukrupaMahakavi Kuvempu Road,Venkatadril, Behind Apollo Hospital,|Bannerghatta Road,Bangalore-560 O76.Aged about 38 years|No.39, Shri GurukrupaMahakavi Kuvempu Road,Venkatadril, Behind Apollo Hospital,|Bannerghatta Road,Bangalore-560 O76. 6.M/s. Dhammanagi Property Developers| Represented by its Partner omt. Mangala Babu Dhammanagi Aged about 53 years|No.137, Railway Parallel Road,Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20.No.137, Railway Parallel Road,Kumara Park West,Bangalore-560 O20. _..Petitioners | (By Sri.Annamalai 8., Advocate along withori. M.Lava, Advocate for Sri. Shankar A., Advocate) AND 1)The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax Bangalore-2, — Office of the Principal Commissioner of. Income-tax-2, 5[th]Floor, Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 3/9 BMTC Building, Koramangala-[th]Block, 80 feet Road,|Bengaluru-560 O95. ? The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax,Central Circle,Central Circle, Office of the Deputy Commissioner of © Income —tax, Saraf Colony, Shraddha Building, Khanapur Road, Tilakwad1,Belagavi-590 OO6. ... Respondents (By Sri K.V. Aravind, Advocate) These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quashthe order passed under the provision of Section 127 ofthe Act by the R-1 vide common order dated 3.7.2017.reterred as Annexure-A.. These Writ Petitions coming on for PreliminaryHearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made thefollowing: Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 4/9 ORDER Sri.Annamalai S., Advocate along withSri.M.Lava,Advocate forSri.Shankar A., Advocate for petitionersSri.K.V.Aravind, Adv. for respondents The petition has been filed by the differentassessees of the same group - M/S.DhammanagiDevelopers Pvt. Ltd., and others. The assessees haveprayed that all the assessments may be consolidatedand transferred to the competent assessing authority atBengaluru, whereas, the learned Commissioner by theimpugned order Annexure-A_ dated3./.2017hastransferred even the assessments at Bengaluru toBelagavi, which is challenged by the present petitionerson the ground of administrative convenience. 2. The reason assigned by the _ respondent Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for transfer of Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 5/9 The petition has been filed by the differentassessees of the same group - M/S.DhammanagiDevelopers Pvt. Ltd., and others. The assessees haveprayed that all the assessments may be consolidatedand transferred to the competent assessing authority atBengaluru, whereas, the learned Commissioner by theimpugned order Annexure-A_ dated3./.2017hastransferred even the assessments at Bengaluru toBelagavi, which is challenged by the present petitionerson the ground of administrative convenience. 2. The reason assigned by the _ respondent Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for transfer of Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 5/9 cases from Bengaluru to Belagavi as recorded in theimpugned order which is quoted below: “Apartfrom)the|above,the|Submission made by the assessee|groupOTL3.7.2017beforetheundersigned are also duly taken noteof and the matter has been discussedwith Pr.CIT (Central)ONFICagain.Therefore,afterconsideringtheassessee group submissions and also"theneed for effective and coordinatedinvestigationandcompletionofassessments,it is necessary that theabove CQdSeSbe centralized with DCIT,Central Circle, BelagavtHence, all theabove cases are being transferred to|DCIT, Central Circle, Belagavt|settingaside the objections of the assessee The order shall come into force|with immediate effect.” Sd/-. (Y. RAJENDRA)| Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (I/C) Bangalore-2, Bangalore. Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 6/9 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-department Mr.Aravind has submitted a chart before this Court thatin all there are 15 assessment cases of the said group,out of which, 4 were being assessed at Belagavi, 2 atMangaluru, 1 at Panaji, 8 at Bengaluru, prior to passingof the impugned order by Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax, under Section 127 of the Act on3./.2017directing transfer and consolidation of all assessees atBelagavi. | 4Learnedcounsel forthe|petitioners,Mr.Annamalai S. however submitted that most of!petitioners-assessees business activity is at Bengaluruand for its administrative convenience, all the cases.may be transferred and consolidated for assessment atBengaluru, then it will be more convenient and Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | practically possible to attend and co-operate in the writproceedings oO. Having heard the learned counsels this Court is oT theopinionthat|the.respondent-Principal Commissioner has not assigned any cogent and over-riding reasons to transfer the cases of assessees fromBengaluru to Belagavi and consolidated all the 195assessments at Belgavi. Obviously the convenience ofthepetitioners-aSSeSSEéesSTOUPforgettingtheseassessments centralized at Bengaluru is apparent, notonly because more number of assessees of the saidsroup were already being assessed at Bengaluru, butthe assessees’ desire and administrative convenience to transfer.allCaSEeETO Bengaluruhas|notbeencontroverted in any manner by the Department. Thereason in the impugned order as quoted above namely“for.effectiveandco-ordinatedinvestigationand Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | Commissioner has not assigned any cogent and over-riding reasons to transfer the cases of assessees fromBengaluru to Belagavi and consolidated all the 195assessments at Belgavi. Obviously the convenience ofthepetitioners-aSSeSSEéesSTOUPforgettingtheseassessments centralized at Bengaluru is apparent, notonly because more number of assessees of the saidsroup were already being assessed at Bengaluru, butthe assessees’ desire and administrative convenience to transfer.allCaSEeETO Bengaluruhas|notbeencontroverted in any manner by the Department. Thereason in the impugned order as quoted above namely“for.effectiveandco-ordinatedinvestigationand Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | completion of assessments”, can be met even atBengaluru also and it is not necessary that the assesseeshould be put to inconvenience for the said reasonspecially when there is no contrary strong reason givenin the impugned order to transfer all the cases toBelagavi. The respondent-Department comprises ofPublic Servants and they have their Offices and Officers.at Bengaluru, who can undertake the assessments workfor all the 15 assessments of this group at any of thesetwo places. Therefore, the comparative convenience ofassessees should be given the preference. 6. Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion thatthe impugned order does not assign any proper reasons.for consolidating and transfer of all the assessmentproceedings of the said Assessee Group at Belagavi andthe said order is therefore liable to be quashed and thesame is quashed. Date of order 13-11-2017 W.P.Nos.36428-36433/2017M/s. Dnammanag! Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., VS. |The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru-2, & another. | 7. The respondent-Department is directed totransfer all the cases pertaining the said group of 19.assessments in numbers to Bengaluru, for completingthe assessments in accordance with law at Bengaluru. The Bengaluru Assessment Authority will proceed fromthe stage where the earlier Assessing Authority has sofar left the assessment proceedings. 8. The Authority to whom such assessments areconsolidated and transferred, may even issue freshnotices to the assessees and the assessees will not be|entitled to raise any objections in regard to the expiry oflimitation resulting on account of pendency of these writpetitions. ap Writ petitions are accordingly|-//"453_ No costs. Sd/-| Sd/-|JUDGE