R.K.AGRAWAL, J. - (1.) BY means of the present petition filed under z the petitioner, M/s Unnao Distilleries and Braveries Ltd., Kanpur seeks the following reliefs: (a) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 18.1.2007 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) passed under Section 127(2) of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Kanpur (respondent No. 1); (b) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of prohibition restraining respondent No. 3 from taking any further action in pursuance of the impugned order dated 18.1.2007 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition), else the petitioner will suffer grave and irreparable loss; (iii) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of writ as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; and (iv) award costs of this petition to the petitioner.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows: The petitioner is a Public Limited Company duly incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It has its registered office at 424, Fourth Floor City Centre, the Mall, Kanpur and factory at Shekhpur, Unnao. The entire business operation takes place from Kanpur. It is being assessed under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at Kanpur. It is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of country liquor and sprit. The Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order for the Assessment Years 2001 -02 to 2004 -05. A notice dated 10th November, 2006 was served upon the petitioner under Section 127(2)(a) of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Kanpur - respondent No. 1 making reference to a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act conducted in the premises of M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd. on 14th February, 2006 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the case be not transferred to the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -19, New Delhi for the purpose of coordinated investigation and meaningful assessment. On receipt of the aforesaid notice the petitioner submitted its reply on 2nd January, 2007. The respondent No. 1 vide order dated 18th January, 2007 had transferred the cases of the petitioner from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax VI, Kanpur to the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -19, New Delhi. The order dated 18th January, 2007 is under challenge in the present writ petition on the ground that the notice dated 10th November, 2006 issued by the respondent No. 1 was absolutely bald and did not state the ground of reasons necessitating such transfer of cases and the petitioner was groping in darkness about the reasons warranting transfer of cases. The entire business activities of the petitioner as well as its Head Officer is at Kanpur and that the notice appears to have been issued under some misapprehension of the facts as it has no connection with other firms and no search and seizure have taken place against the petitioner company. The authorities are acting with predetermination and the impugned order is totally a non -speaking order. Thus, the entire proceedings including the transfer of cases culminated in the impugned order are null and void.
(3.) WE have heard Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.;