hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8774 OF 2009 Dilesh C. Shah & Anr. ... Petitioners Versus Union of India and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Jitendra Jain with Mr. Sashi Tulsiani i/by Sutapa Saha for Petitioners. Mr. A.S. Shivsharan for Respondents. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 15, 2009 P.C. Rule. By consent heard forthwith. The Petitioner by the present petition impugns the order dated 15.6.2009. By that order, the assessees’ cases have been transferred from I.T.O. Ward NO. 19(2)(3) and I.T.O. Ward No. 19(2)(1) to DCIT Central Circle I , Thane. The contention of the Petitioner is that this amounts to infraction of the provisions of Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act in as much as the mandatory requirement of hearing was not given to the Petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, the learned counsel does not dispute the fact that hearing was not given to the Petitioner. In the light of that, the following order : The impugned order dated 15.6.2009 is set aside. The matter restored to file of Commissioner of I.T.O. Ward (19)(2)(1) who after giving opportunity to the Petitioner of hearing, to pass appropriate order according to law. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. (D.G. KARNIK,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)