Thursday, April 26, 2012

Q whether the s. 127(2) transfer order is invalid for want of reasons referred to Full Bench

Millenniun Houseware vs. CIT (Gujarat High Court)


 
The CIT, Valsad, passed an order u/s 127(2) centralizing the assessee’s case from Vapi to Surat “to facilitate coordinated and effective investigation”. The assessee challenged the order on the ground that as no reasons were given in the s. 127(2) order (though given in the affidavit-in-reply), the s. 127(2) order had to be struck down as per Ajanta Industries vs. CBDT 102 ITR 281 (SC). The department relied on Arti Ship Breaking vs. DIT 244 ITR 333 (Guj) where it was held that Ajanta Industries was no longer good law and reasons were not required to be stated in the order. HELD by the Court:

No comments:

Delhi HC holds 10% pre-deposit requirement for penalty-only appeals inapplicable where SCN was issued before amendment

  This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court (HC) [1] on whether the newly introduced pre-deposit requirement for fi...