Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Nigam,J.
Heard Shri R.R. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for respondents No. 1,2 and 3. By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 20.11.2009 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Kanpur, who has transferred the case of the petitioner from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Kanpur to Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Lucknow.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in pursuance of the notice under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner has filed the reply dated 11.08.2009 but without considering the reply of the petitioner and without giving any reason in the order, the case of the petitioner has been transferred from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Kanpur to Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Lucknow. We have perused the impugned order under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act. The order reveals that the explanation of the petitioner has not been considered and no reason whatsoever has been given for transferring the case from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Kanpur to Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Lucknow. In this view of the matter, we find that the order impugned is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed.
The order dated 20.11.2009 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Kanpur is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner of Income Tax to pass a fresh reasoned order after considering the reply of the petitioner in accordance to law.
Order Date :- 13.1.2010 MK/