T C GUPTA vs UNOIN OF INDIA

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

WRIT PETITION NO.23809 OF 2018 (S CAT)

BETWEEN:

T.C.Gupta, S/o. Shri Gyan Chand Gupta, Aged about 63 years, R/o. S-77, Golden Enclave, Old Airport Road, Bangalore-560017. Retired on 30.06.2014 Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore.

... Petitioner (By Sri. T.C.Gupta, Advocate (Party in Person))

AND:

Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi-110001.

2 2. The Pr. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA), C.R.Building,

Bangalore-560001.

... Respondents

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to order dated 23.10.2017 in OA No.260/2017 and order dated 18.04.2018 in RA No.55/2017 passed by the CAT Bench Bangalore (T.C.Gupta Vs. UOI & Ors) Annexure-B and D, may kindly be quashed and set aside and writ petition may kindly be allowed directing to extend the time for shifting of personal effects in terms of prayer raised.

This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing, this day, A.S.Bopanna J., made the following:

ORDER

The petitioner in person is before this court assailing the order dated 23.10.2017 passed in O.A.260/2017 and the order dated 18.04.2018 passed in R.A.No.55/2017 which are impugned at Annexures ‘B’ and ‘D’ to the petition. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the non-grant of allowance to shift from Bengaluru to Jodhpur

3 as provided under the Rule as relied upon by the petitioner, was before the CAT seeking relief in that regard.

The CAT while considering the claim of the petitioner has taken into consideration the entire aspect of the matter and has arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner having retired at Bengaluru has continued to stay in Bengaluru and has also commenced his practice as an advocate and is regularly practicing in Bengaluru. It is in that situation, the CAT was of the opinion that the claim of allowance to shift from Bengaluru to Jodhpur was appropriately not considered and the respondents have not committed any error in that regard. As against the factual position, that has been recorded by the CAT, there is no other material to discredit the same. In that view, we are of the opinion that the conclusion as reached by the CAT does not call for interference.

The petition therefore being devoid of merit, stands disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

T C GUPTA vs. UNOIN OF INDIA