Mahendra Singh Rao v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakarbhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19355/2022 Mahendra Singh Rao S/o Shri Raj Singh Rao, Aged About 33Years, Resident Of 128, Talab Ka Kua, Boyna, Tehsil Mavli,Udaipur 313201 (Pan No. Eqvpr7358D). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, AayakarBhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur 313001.Bhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur 313001. 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Udaipur. 3. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Aayakar Bhawan,Mananchira, Kozhikode 673001 (Kerala).Mananchira, Kozhikode 673001 (Kerala). 4. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2,Aayakar Bhavan, Mananchira, Kozhikode 673001 (Kerala).Aayakar Bhavan, Mananchira, Kozhikode 673001 (Kerala). 5. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), AayakarBhavan, C R Building, Is Press Road, Kochi 682018(Kerala).Bhavan, C R Building, Is Press Road, Kochi 682018(Kerala). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : For Respondent(s): Mr. K. K. BissaFor Respondent(s): Mr. K. K. Bissa : Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT Order 24/08/2023 This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging theorder dated 22.06.2022 passed by the Principal Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Udaipur while exercising powers under Section 127 ofthe Income Tax Act and consequential impugned notice dated30.06.2022 issued under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act andthe notices dated 16.11.2022 and 29.12.2022 issued underSection 142 of the Income Tax Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that beforetransferring the case of the petitioner from ITO, Ward – 2(1),Udaipur to ITO, Ward -1(3), Kozhikode, no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner as provided under Section 127 of theIncome Tax Act. It is submitted by learned counsel for thepetitioner that this Court in DBCWP No.6847/2021 (MurliwalaAgrotech Private Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.) decided on20.07.2022, involving identical issue, has set aside the transferorder and the notices issued by the concerned authority whileholding that it is mandatory for the concerned authority to provideopportunity of hearing to the assessee before transferring thecase. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position todispute the above fact. In these circumstances, the instant writ petition is allowed.The impugned transfer order dated 22.06.2022 and consequentialnotices dated 30.06.2022, 16.11.2022 and 29.12.2022 are setaside. The respondents are permitted to resume the proceedingsfrom the stage former to the transfer order dated 22.06.2022 waspassed. If it is still proposed to transfer the case of the petitioner,opportunity of hearing shall be provided to him and thereafter,proceedings shall be continued and concluded as per law within aperiod of six months from the date of production of certified copyof this order. No order as to costs. Stay petition is disposed of. (YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J 79-AjaySingh/-