MADHU KHURANA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned advocate for the Respondents is directed to waive service. Having regard to the controversy involved in the present petition, which lies in a very narrow compass, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) This petition has been filed with the following prayers:

(3.) The facts stated briefly are that vide notice dt. 29th July, 2009 issued by the Dy. CIT, Circle-7, Ahmedabad, the Petitioner was informed that the Dy. Director of Investigation, Bhopal, had made a proposal for centralization of her case in connection with the search and seizure action carried out in case of Shri Avtarsingh Khurana and Others. It was further stated in the notice that the Petitioner was being given an opportunity of being heard with regard to the said subject and was requested to attend the office of the Dy. CIT or furnish a reply in writing before the date specified in the notice, if she wanted to represent her views in the matter. In response to the said notice, the Petitioner filed a reply dt. 6th Aug., 2009 addressed to the Dy. CIT objecting to the proposal of centralization and transfer of the Petitioner's case to Bhopal. The Petitioner also addressed a similar letter to the Respondent No. 1 CIT, Ahmedabad-III, reiterating the reasons for not transferring her case to Bhopal.