Calcutta HC upholds transfer of case u/s 127 of ex-CM of MP “Kamal Nath” from Calcutta to Delhi

Case Details: Kamal Nath v. PCIT - [2023] 146 taxmann.com 182 (Calcutta)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
  • Dr A.M. Singhvi, J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advs. Varun Chopra, Saurabh Bagaria, Amit Agarwalla & Aniruddha Agarwalla for the Petitioner.
  • Tushar Mehta, Ld. Solicitor General Balbir Singh, Ld. ASG Zoheb Hossain, Dhiraj Trivedi, Tilak Mitra & Soumen Bhattacharjee for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

A search operation was conducted on assessee along with other individuals at different locations by the investigating Wing, New Delhi. The tax authorities found certain evidences indicating that the assessee was involved in large-scale collection of black money.

After considering all the available evidences, a show-cause notice was issued on the assessee for transferring the case from Calcutta jurisdiction to New Delhi jurisdiction for the purpose of a coordinated deep investigation. Subsequently, the order under section 127 was passed by the authorities confirming the change of jurisdiction after giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Aggrieved by the order, a writ petition was filed to the Calcutta High Court.

High Court Held

The Court held that all the reasons pertaining to such transfer had been clearly indicated by the tax authorities to the assessee, to which the assessee was given a proper opportunity of being heard.

Further, a certain amount of cash was also found from the assessee’s residence at New Delhi and some unaccounted cash transactions were also found in the Whatsapp chats accompanied by certain documents. The transfer was not only based on surmises and conjectures since the assessee’s name was pointed out by many persons under investigation.

In the instant case, the assessee denied the transfer of case to New Delhi jurisdiction only because of the inconvenience that may arise to the assessee. However, it is noted that the assessee already owns residence in New Delhi. Thus, the argument that assessee was willing to cooperate in investigation was of no relevance.

The order passed under section 127 by the authorities does not require a detailed explanation and concrete financial nexus, but certain facts indicating the need for further investigation are sufficient. Therefore, the Court did not find any infirmity in the order of transferring the case from Calcutta to New Delhi as proper opportunity was granted and all the reasons for such transfer were communicated.