Nagendra Rai, J.

1. The petitioner, a political party duly registered with the Election Commission of India, having its head office at Bariatu Road, Ranchi, has filed the present writ application for quashing the order dated December 2, 1996, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi, in exercise of the power under Sec. 127(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), by which he has transferred the case of the petitioner from the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Ranchi, the Assessing Officer, to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle IV, under the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi. By the same order the case of four other persons, namely, Suraj Mandal, President, Sibu Soren, Vice-President, Sailendra Mahto, Secretary, and Simon Morandi, a member of the petitioner, have also been transferred, a copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure "7" to the writ application.

2. The petitioner is an assessee under the Act and was being assessed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Special Range, Ranchi. The case of the petitioner was transferred to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Ranchi. Sibu Soren, Suraj Mandal, Sailendra Mahto and Simon Morandi M.P. and Ex. M.P., are alleged to have taken bribes in crores of rupees from a political party for supporting it during the no confidence motion in Parliament. The matter is being investigated by the C.B.I, and huge amounts deposited in the fixed deposit, savings bank account, Kisan Vikas Patra were found either in their names or in the names of their family members. Immovable properties were also found to have been purchased by them in Delhi. The investigation of the case by the C.B.I, is being monitored by the Delhi High Court. All the papers including the papers seized from the office of the petitioner were also taken into possession by the C.B.I., Delhi, in connection with the investigation and charge-sheet has been submitted against them.

3. The aforesaid office bearers and members of the petitioner were examined under Sec. 131 of the Act and they stated, inter alia, that Rs. 60 lakhs deposited in their names in fixed deposit had come out from party funds. They also stated that they have purchased flats in Delhi from the party funds.

4. The Income-tax Commissioner, Ranchi, taking into consideration the aforesaid fact, issued notice to the petitioner as well as the aforesaid four persons separately under Sec. 127 of the Act to show cause as to why their cases be not transferred from Ranchi to Delhi. It was mentioned, inter alia, in the notice that enquiries/investigations are being conducted with regard to the sources of income of the office bearers of the petitioner by the Income-tax Department, Ranchi, and the C.B.I., Delhi, the C.B.I, cases are being monitored by the Delhi High Court and all the connected papers collected and information gathered are with the C.B.I., New Delhi. The office bearers of the petitioner have acquired huge movable and immovable properties in Delhi in connection with which they are staying there. As no progress is being made in the cases in Ranchi, it has become necessary on account of administrative convenience and better coordinated investigation for proper assessment to transfer their cases from Ranchi to Delhi.

5. The petitioner filed a show cause and objected to the transfer of the proceeding primarily on the ground that the head office of the petitioner is at Ranchi and the facility of coordinated investigation cannot be a ground for transfer of the case. It was also asserted that the requirement of Sec. 127 of the Act regarding agreement between the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi, and that of Delhi has not been complied with and the transfer will result in inconvenience and hardship to the petitioner.

6. The respondent-Commissioner, after having considered the show cause of the petitioner and after having heard counsel for the petitioner, passed the i