CWP No. 20870 of 2011 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 20870 of 2011 Date of decision: November 11, 2011. Shri Hitesh Gandhi ... Petitioner v. Union of India & Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA Present: Shri S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Hemant Gupta , J. (Oral): Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order Annexure P-1, dated 9.8.2010 whereby the assessment case of the petitioner was transferred from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range II, Jalandhar to Central Circle, Jalandhar. The grievance of the petitioner is that no reasons have been recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar when the assessment case was transferred and has asserted that the Assessing Officer is at Jalandhar Division as the petitioner is an assessee at Nawanshahar, therefore, order of transfer cannot be passed without granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In support of this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Annexure P-2. We find that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the the petitioner is assessed at Nawanshahar, is factually CWP No. 20870 of 2011 -: 2 :- incorrect. A perusal of Annexure P-2, upon which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioner, reveals that the return was signed by the petitioner at Nawanshahar. The digital signatures at Nawanshahar does not make the the petitioner is being assessed at Nawanshahar. The Commissioner of Income Tax in the order Annexure P-1 has noticed that the Assessing Officer of the petitioner is at Jalandhar and the proceedings have been transferred to the jurisdiction to Central Circle II, Jalandhar. In terms of sub-section (3) of Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) are not required to be complied with if the offices of all such officers situate in the same city, locality or area. In view of the said fact, we do not find any illegality in the order passed nor the petitioner has suffered any prejudice. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. [ Hemant Gupta ] Judge [ G.S. Sandhawalia ] November 11, 2011. Judge kadyan