- (1.) The abovenoted writ petitions arise from a common impugned order dated April 4, 2005 (annexure 5 in both the writ petitions), passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax in exercise of his jurisdiction under Section 127(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (called "the Act"), read with Section 11, Wealth-tax Act and Section 7 of the Gift-tax Act, 1958, transferring the cases of the petitioners from Kanpur to Delhi. A show-cause notice dated March 16, 2005, was given to the petitioner as required under Section 127(1) of the Act/annexure 3 to the writ petition giving opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order under Section 127(2) of the Act. The said notice was given in view of the search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act conducted on July 2, 2003, in the premises belonging to the firm and companies (referred to as Shikhar Gutkha group) and their partners/directors while proposing to transfer the cases of the said assessee-petitioner "for the purposes of co-ordinated and effective investigation" from Kanpur to Delhi. The petitioner, Virendra Kumar Jain, submitted reply dated April 1, 2005, requesting the authority to inform him the material and evidence on the basis of which it had come to the conclusion that the assessee had connections with the Shikhar Gutkha group. According to the petitioner, the said information was sought in this regard earlier also.
(2.) In the case of M/s. Vijay Kumar Pradeep Kumar (W. P. No. 756 of 2005), show cause notice under Section 127(1) of the Act contained similar averments as in the case of Virender Kumar Jain (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 755 of 2005). In response to the said notice, the assessee in question (Vijay Kumar Pradeep Kumar) submitted reply dated August 20, 2004/annexure 2 to the writ petition. In this reply also it was stated "We may submit that we have no connection with the Shikhar Gutkha group except with the fact that one of the partners Shri Pradeep Kumar Agrawal is a director therein. You have not assigned any reason in the notice under reference, the manner in which our firm has been found to be connected with the Shikhar Gutkha group. Our concern is a small partnership firm, entirely different entity from the company M/s. Trimurti Fragrances P. Ltd., manufacturer of Shikhar brand gutkha ...."
(3.) It was further mentioned in the reply that the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur, had initiated action against two partners of the said firm who had filed writ petition before the High Court wherein proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax-I, New Delhi, were got stayed.;