Kashinath Tapuriah vs Income Tax Officer (Technical)
ID: F2J-C-2680 Court: Calcutta High Court Case number: W.P. No.1784 of 2008 Decision date: 2009-02-11 Outcome: DISPOSED
Finin2min decision brief
Calcutta High Court ruling in W.P. No.1784 of 2008. Operative-order extract: Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the submissions of the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Income Tax Officer, (Technical), Kolkata-XI, respondent no.1 to furnish a copy of the order passed under section 127 of the Act to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of communication of this order.
Why this ruling matters
This page provides the complete searchable court text, source provenance and operative-order context for a current income-tax ruling. Application depends on the assessment year, statutory text and binding jurisdiction.
Editorial control: The complete court text below controls. Later appellate history is marked CHECK_REQUIRED and has not been inferred.
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Calcutta High Court
Kashinath Tapuriah vs Income Tax Officer (Technical) on 11 February, 2009
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
W.P. No.1784 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
Kashinath Tapuriah.
Versus
Income Tax Officer (Technical),XI, Kolkata & Ors.
Appearance:
Mr.R. Bharadwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Dipak Som, Sr. Advocate for the respondents.
Before The Hon'ble Justice SOUMITRA PAL Date : 11th February, 2009.
The Court: Affidavit of service filed in court today be kept with the records.
In this writ petition the petitioner, stated to be an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, has challenged the notice dated 30th March, 2007 issued by the Income Tax Officer (Technical), Kolkata-XI, respondent no.1 requesting the petitioner to appear on or before 10th April, 2007 to present his case regarding the transfer his case from Kolkata to Mumbai. Further, oral prayer has been made for a direction upon the said respondent to furnish a copy of the order dated 7th August, 2007 passed under Section 127 of the Act.
Mr. Som, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the writ petition is not maintainable since it appears from the assessment order dated 31st December, 2007 for the assessment year 2000-01 that the case was centralized by an order dated 7th August, 2007 and the records were received at Mumbai on 20th September, 2007. Moreover, it appears from 2 paragraph-5 of the order that the petitioner had participated in the assessment proceedings in Mumbai.
Mr. Bharadwaj, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that since the petitioner by a letter dated 7th April, 2007 objected to the transfer as requested by the notice dated 30th March, 2007, though he had participated in the assessment proceedings, he is entitled to have a copy of the order passed under section 127 of the Act.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the submissions of the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Income Tax Officer, (Technical), Kolkata-XI, respondent no.1 to furnish a copy of the order passed under section 127 of the Act to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of communication of this order.
Since the respondents were not called upon to file affidavits controverting the allegations in the writ petition, the allegations are deemed not to have been admitted by them No order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the appearing parties on priority basis.
(SOUMITRA PAL,J.) ssaha Asstt.Registrar (C.R.)
Practitioner verification checklist
Confirm the assessment year and the statutory version considered.
Separate the binding ratio from fact-specific findings and procedural directions.
Check territorial jurisdiction, appealability and any later stay, review or reversal.
Reconcile cited sections and monetary thresholds with the law applicable to the user’s period.
Questions answered
What did the court decide?
Calcutta High Court ruling in W.P. No.1784 of 2008. Operative-order extract: Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the submissions of the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Income Tax Officer, (Technical), Kolkata-XI, respondent no.1 to furnish a copy of the order passed under section 127 of the Act to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of communication of this order.
Which case and court does this page cover?
W.P. No.1784 of 2008, decided by Calcutta High Court on 2009-02-11.
Is the complete judgment available?
Yes. The complete searchable public court text appears on this page and in the downloadable local reference PDF.
What should be checked before relying on this ruling?
Verify the assessment year, applicable statutory text, territorial and appellate jurisdiction, and any later appeal, review, stay or contrary binding authority.