J SRINIVASAN Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Sivaraman, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. A.P. Srinivas and Mr. A.N.R. Jayaprathap, the learned Senior Standing Counsels for the respondent, and carefully perused the materials placed on record, including the counter affidavit filed by the respondent. Since the relief sought for, in these Writ Petitions is common and the petitioner in W.P. No. 31217 of 2017, being the Company and the other petitioners, being the Directors, all these Writ Petitions were heard together and disposed of, by the common order. W.P. No. 31217 of 2017, filed by the Company is taken as a lead case, and it would suffice to refer to the facts stated thereunder.

(2.) The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorari, to quash the notice issued by the respondent under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act') dated 14.09.2017. The proceedings, which led to the issuance of the impugned notice are as hereunder:-

(3.) The sheet anchor of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that, the impugned notices are in violation of the limitation prescribed under Section 275 of the Act. It is further submitted that the respondent ought to have initiated penalty proceedings for the impugned assessment years (in W.P. No. 31217 of 2017, AY 2011-12) either before the end of the financial year, in which, the proceedings have been initiated, or within a period of six months from the date of passing of the order by the CIT (A).