RIMJHIM ISPAT LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SRI KSHITIZ AGARWAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND UNION OF INDIA (UOI) THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, M/s Rimjhim Ispat Ltd., Kanpur seeks the following reliefs: (i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order of transfer of cases of the petitioner from Kanpur to New Delhi dated 4.1.2007 (Annexure VII to this writ petition) passed by respondent No. 1; (ii) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining respondent No. 2 from proceeding with the case in pursuance of the order dated 4.1.2007 (Annexure VII to this writ petition); (iii) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of writ as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case; and (iv) award costs of this petition to the humble petitioner throughout.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows: According to the petitioner it is engaged in manufacture of Stainless Steel Billets, Flat Wire Rods, etc. in its factory situated at Bharua Sumerpur, District Hamirpur. It is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and has its registered office at 123/355, Fazalganj, Kanpur. According to the petitioner it is also engaged in undertaking the work of liaisoning with public offices and other incidental activities. It had rendered services to M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. and was paid a sum of Rs. 8.43 crores during the Financial Years 2002 -03 to 2004 -05 M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. while making the payment also deducted tax at source. It is being assessed to income tax. The assessments for the Assessment Years 2003 -04 (Financial Year 2002 -03) and 2004 -05 (Financial Year 2003 -04) have been made under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). According to the petitioner the amount received from M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd has been disclosed in the return filed by it for the relevant assessment year. The assessment for the Assessment Year 2005 -06 (Financial Year 2004 -05) is pending.

(3.) THE order dated 4th January, 2007 is under challenge in the present writ petition on the ground that the notice dated 10th November, 2006 does not spell out the reasons for issuing of such a notice and it also fails to disclose the material on the basis of which the respondent No. 1 was satisfied that the cases warranted transfer from Kanpur to New Delhi. Further the petitioner was never supplied the documents on the basis of which the respondent No. 1 came to the conclusion that the cases deserve to be transferred from Kanpur to New Delhi. The petitioner's company belongs to a group consisting of five Public Limited Company, two Private Limited Company and one Partnership Firm and voluminous records are required to be transported for the purpose of assessment which is not only an uphill task but also impossible. Further ground of attack is that the order dated 4th January, 2007 has been passed at the command and behest of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III, Delhi and in fact the respondent No. 1 abjectly surrendered his discretion and has mechanically dittoed the order on the ground of the draft order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III, Delhi. The main reason recorded by the respondent No. 1 for transferring the case is not at all germane and is grounded on non -existent factual premises. The writ petition came up before the Court on 7th February, 2007 when the Court directed Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel to obtain instruction regarding Annexure -8 which is a letter sent by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III, Delhi to the respondent No. 1 in which the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III, Delhi had given the reasons for transferring the cases. The matter was directed to be placed before the Court on 12th February, 2007, Sri A. N. Mahajan after obtaining instruction has placed before the Court the letter dated 15th November, 2006 sent by the respondent No. 1 to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III, Delhi by which he had sought some more material for passing the order of transfer. The Annexure -8 is the letter sent in reply to the letter dated 15th November, 2006.