COURT: | Bombay High Court |
CORAM: | A. K. Menon J., A. S. Oka J |
SECTION(S): | 127 |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | transfer of case |
COUNSEL: | Nishant Thakkar, Vikram Nankani |
DATE: | October 11, 2017 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | January 25, 2018 (Date of publication) |
AY: | - |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
S. 127(2) Transfer of case: The existence of agreement between two jurisdictional Commissioners is a condition precedent for passing the order of transfer. The agreement cannot be implied because S. 127(2) (2) (a) contemplates a positive state of mind of the two jurisdictional CsIT. Absence of disagreement cannot tantamount to agreement |
The existence of such agreement between two jurisdictional Commissioners is a condition precedent for passing the order of transfer. Except for the request which came from the investigation office, Chennai of transferring the case, there is no reference whatsoever to any such agreement. Clause (b) of subsection (2) of section 127 provides for consequences when there is no such agreement. When the jurisdiction to pass an order of transfer under clause (a) of subsection (2) of Section 127 can be exercised only when there is such an agreement, the fact that such an agreement exists ought to have been stated in the the show cause notice as the same is a jurisdictional fact. Apart from the failure to mention the same in the show cause notice, the only stand of the revenue is that there is an agreement by implication
Recent Comments