Transfer Order is administrative order and not quasi-judicial order, Assessee don’t have any right to choose Assessing Authority: Madras HC [Read Judgment]

The Madras High Court held that the Transfer Order is an administrative order and not a quasi-judicial order. The assessee does not have any right to choose Assessing Authority.

The Appellant Assessee, M/s.Advantage Strategic Consulting has challenged the transfer order and consolidation of cases of the Appellant Assessee on account of centralisation of search and seizure cases.

The order was passed by M/s.Anu J Singh, IRS, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai-1and the proceedings of the Assessee, were transferred from DCIT to another parallel authority, DCIT, Central Circle 2(1), Chennai. The learned Single Judge did not find any ground to interfere with the said consolidation and transfer of cases from one Assessing Officer to another.

The Assessee emphasized that the Assessment Order was said to be kept in a sealed cover and since it was to abide by the order of the Division Bench, the Assessing Authority could not have passed the said order and he has requested the Assessing Authority to withdraw the said Assessment Order and merely on account of the pendency of Writ Appeal, the Assessee neither chose to pay the demand raised in pursuance of the said Assessment Order nor filed any regular appeal against that before the CIT(A).

The Additional Solicitor General of India submitted that the appeal against the transfer orders under Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in any case have become infructuous, as the Authority to whom the proceedings were transferred has already passed the Assessment Order and the same has been served on the Appellant Assessee also.

The division judge bench of Justice Vineeth Kothari and Justice M.S.Ramesh held that the Assessee can only be concerned with getting an opportunity of hearing before the concerned Assessing Authority and adduce his evidence and make his submissions before the concerned Assessing Authority.

“The Income Tax Department has recently introduced a Scheme of Faceless Assessments which will avoid personal hearing and physical interaction of Assessee and Assessing Authority altogether,” the bench added.

The court held that the Assessee need not even know the name of the Assessing Authority who will deal with his case. The process of hearing appears to have been undertaken by the Assessing Authority who passed the order during the pendency of the writ petition with the permission of the Court, and the Assessment Order to be kept in sealed cover and which was served on the Assessee after the dismissal of the Writ Petition.