Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anand Educational Technical And ... vs Deputy Commissioner Income Tax Central ... on 27 November, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 WP-45064-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
WP No. 45064 of 2025
(ANAND EDUCATIONAL TECHNICAL AND VOCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME
TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE AND OTHERS )
Dated : 27-11-2025
Shri Shri Manoj Munshi - Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Lucky Jain -
Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harsh Parasar assisted by Ms. Yashika Bondwal - Advocate for the
respondents on advance notice.
The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
challenging the orders dated 12.12.2023 and 06.11.2025 passed by the respondent
Nos.1 and 2 respectively. The petitioner is a charitable trust registered since 2004
under section 12(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as "Act,
1961") and its registration was renewed from time to time.
2. By impugned order, the respondent No.2 in exercise of the powers
conferred under section 127(2) of the Act, 1961 transferred the case from
Accessing Authority DCIT, (Exemption), Bhopal to DCIT (Central Circle-1),
Indore for proper and consolidated investigation, assessment of the case and for all
other purposes. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 06.11.2025
(Annexure P/5) by which the objection challenging jurisdiction and validity of the
order dated 12.12.2023 has been rejected.
3. Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order mainly on the ground
that, (i) order has been passed without assigning reason, (ii) no opportunity of
hearing has been given to the petitioner before passing the impuned order, (iii) the
order has been passed beyond the period of time limit and, (iv) the order has not
been communicated. In support of his submissions, he relied on the judgments
2 WP-45064-2025
passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Ajantha Industries and Others
V/s Central Board of Direct Taxes, New, 1976 SCC 1 1001 a n d Vijayasanthi
Investments Pvt. Ltd. V/s Chief Commission of Income-Tax, 1990 SCC OnLine
AP 382.
4. Per contra, Standing counsel for the respondent on advance notice
justified the order impugned. He mainly raised the objection that the impugned
order of transfer was passed on 12.12.2023 and thereafter, the case was transferred
to the DCIT, (Central Circle-1), Indore and the petitioner appeared before him as
many as on 8 occasions, but did not submit any objection. The notices were also
issued by the said authority under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for different
annual years and also the notice was issued under Section 143(2) of the Act, 1961.
A notice for filing of the return under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was issued for
annual year 2017-18 and 2020-21. Even the notices were issued for filing of
objection and disposal of objections. On 11.10.2025 first notice under Section
142(1) of the Act,1961 was also issued, the said authority also issued notice on
11.10.2025 regarding renewal of the registration. After the long period, first time
the petitioner filed objection on 03.11.2025 challenging jurisdiction and validity
of the order under Section 127(2) of the Act, 1961. Thus he participated in the
proceedings and only when the authority intended to pass the final order as per the
time limit prescribed under the statute, the said objection has been filed.
5. In regard to the aforesaid grounds raised by the petitioner and the
respondents, they were heard at length.
6. In addition to the aforesaid grounds, counsel for the petitioner argued that
the transfer of the case of the petitioner from DCIT, (Exemption), Bhopal to DCIT
(Central Circle-1), Indore by Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bhopal
is contrary to the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. As per the
3 WP-45064-2025
said circular, the case relating to exemption like of the petitioner could not have
been transferred from DCIT, (Exemption), Bhopal to DCIT (Central Circle-1),
Indore which is not dealing with the exemption cases. For the said point, counsel
for the respondent argued that the aforesaid point was not raised in the objection
and, therefore, he is not in a position to address on the said issue. He prays for
time to examine the said issue and to argue on the same. He further submitted that
till the said issue is argued, he will advise the authority not to pass final order.
7. In view of the aforesaid, for arguments on the additional issue regarding
transfer of case from exemption to non-exemption authority urged to be contrary
to the Central Board of Direct Taxes circular, the hearing of the case is postponed
to 09.12.2025.
8. In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondent, the
authority who is seized with the matter, shall not pass final order till the next date
of hearing.
List on 09.12.2025.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Divyansh
