Actor vijai income tax case Govt Tax adv Ap Srinivasan detailed counter

by Sekar Reporter · September 23, 2025

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE A r MADRAS
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
W.P.No. 21006 of 2022
Chandrasekaran Joseph Vijay
Villa 105, 3 rd Avenue,
Panaiyur, Chennai – 600 019
PAN: AABPV3488N petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 2(2),
Income Tax Department,
108, Nungambakkam High Road,
Nungambakkam
Chennai – 600 -034
2. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Range -2,
Income Tax Department,
108, Nungambakkam High Road,
Nungambakkam
Chennai – 600 -034
3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central — 2, Chennai,
Income Tax Department
108, Nungambakkam High Road,
Nungambakkam
Chennai – 600 034. Respondents
COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
l, B.Malathi, D/o K.Balakrishnan, Hindu, Aged 35 Years, Presently serving as the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Nungambakkam, Chennai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows.
Page No: 1 Corrns: HI. B, IRS.
irc;e -2

1. I subnnit that I am the respondent and the assessing officer of the petitioner herein and I am aware of the facts of the case as borne out frorn the records available in this office.
2. It is submitted that in reply to para 2, the subject matter of the appeal filed before I TAT by the petitioner was the validjty of Notice issued u/s 271AAB by the AO and therefore, the penalty initiated was kept in abeyance. As the I TAT upheld the validity of the notice issued by the AO and so the matter has reached finality, penalty order was passed on 30.06.2022 which was well within 6 months of the receipt of order Of the ‘TAT dated 13 05.2022 in ITA No.3345/Chny/2019 as per period of limitation prescribed u/s 275(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
3. It is submitted that In reply to para 3, the Penalty Order passed on
30.06.2022 is as per law and hence the same is valid.
4. It is submitted that in reply to para 6, the assessment order was completed on 30.12.2017 wherein it was mentioned as penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c)/271AAB will be initiated separately. Penalty notice u/s 271AAB was issued on 11.12.2018. The penalty proceedings was kept in abeyance as appeal was pending against the Assessment Order dated 30.12.2017.
5. It is submitted that in reply to para 7 to 13, the petitioner has filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals-18), Chennai who vide order dated 20.07.2018 in ITA No.338/17-18 partly allowed the appeal. As the petitioner has stated the facts of the case, no submission is made in this regard.
6. It is submitted that in reply to para 14, based on the fact that notice u/s 271AAB was issued on 11.12.2018 by the assessing officer, the Hon’ble TAT allowed the petitioner’s appeal vide order dated 13.05.2022 in ITA
Page No: 2 Corrns:
B, IRS.
-34. Chen
No.3345/Chny/2019 and upheld the validity of notice u/S 271 AAB dated
1 1 . 1 2.201 8.
7. It is subtnitted that in reply to Para 15 , the subject matter of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the I TAT was the validity of the notice issued u/s 271AAB on 11.12.2018. Since the validity of the same was upheld by order of the Hon’ble ITAT in ITA No.3367/Chny/2018 on 22.12.2021, The penalty order u/s 271AAB has been passed on 30.06.2022 i.e. within 6 months period of limitation prescribed u/s 275(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further, it is pertinent to mention that the petitioner has not submitted any evidence in support of any appeal / miscellaneous petition filed against the order of I TAT dated 13.05.2022 wherein the validity of the notice u/s 271AAB issued by AO was upheld.
8. It is submitted that in reply to para 16, the objection of the petitioner that penal proceedings were barred by limitation is not acceptable because it is reiterated that vide order in ITA No.3345/Chny/2019 dated 13 05.2022, the Hon’ble I TAT upheld the validity of notice u/s 271AAB dated 11.12.2018. Further, vide order of the Hon’ble I TAT in ITA No.3367/Chny/2018 dated 22.12.2021 the matter of appeal for which penalty was kept in abeyance reached finality and hence the order u/s 271AAB(1) dated 30.06.2022 is well within the time limit prescribed u/s 275(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961
9. It is submitted that in reply to para 17 & 18, the matter reached finality only on receipt of the Hon’ble I TAT order dated 22.12.2021. As per section 275(1 the penalty order was to be passed within 6 months of receipt of the appellate order. Accordingly, the penalty order was passed on 30.06.2022, wherein the objection of the petitioner was considered however, the same was rightly rejected in the very penalty order itself.
Page No: 3 Corrns:

It is that in reply to Para 19, the petitioner has option to

file/challenge the order dated 30 06 9022 levying penalty before the First Appellate Authority i.e. the CIT(A)• Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be

dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy
Grounds
1 1. It is submitted that in reply to para a, the order dated 30.06.2022 passed u/s 271AAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is as per law.
12. It is submitted that in reply to para b, the order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB is passed within 6 months Of receiving the order of Hon’ble I TAT dated
22.12.2021 and hence the order is passed within the time limit and hence the same is sustainable in law.
13. It is submitted that in reply to para c the objection of the petitioner in relation to the aspect of limitation is duly considered while passing the order but the same is not acceptable for the reason that the matter reached finality only by order of the Hontble ITAT dated 22.12.2021 and within 6 months the order is passed.
14. It is submitted that in reply to para at d , a notice u/s 271AAB dated 11.12.2018 was issued to the assessee. Considering that the penalty notice is already issued, the Hon’ble I TAT allowed the petitioner’s appeal against the revision order u/s 263 of the Act, however the Honlble ITAT in its order upheld the validity of notice u/s 271 AAB dated 11.12.2018. Hence, the penalty order dated 30.06 2022 was passed.
B, l.R.s.
Page No: 4
Corrns:
(2)

15. to para e’ the Hon’ble ITAT has upheld the validity of penalty notice dated and hence so penalty proceedings kept in abeyance was resumed as the subject matter had reached finality Consequently, penalty order u/s 271 AAB was Passed.
16. It is submitted that in reply to para f, revision order u/s 263 passed by the Pr. CIT, which was annulled by the Hon’ble I TAT do not affect the instant order u/s 271 AAB dated 30.062022.
17. It is submitted that in reply to para g, the matter dealt in Assessment
Order reached finality only by order of the Hon’ble I TAT dated 22.12.2021 within 6 months of which order imposing penalty is passed. Relevant section of the Income tax act is produced below:
[Bar of limitation for imposing penalties.
275. L((l)] No order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall be passed-
16[(a) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subjectmatter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 L[or section 246A1 or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, afier the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed”, or six months from the end of the month in which the order of the 20(***] Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Appellate Tribunal is
received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, whichever period expires later.
Provided that in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject-matter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A, and the Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or afier the 1st day of June, 2003 disposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings,
Page No: 5 Corrns:
HI. B, I.R.S. e-Tax

/6/ in the course of which action for itnpositi0f) of pena/ly has been initiated, are convleted, or within one year from the end of the financial year in which the order of the Convnissioner (Appeals) is received by the Chief Commissioner or* Conunissioner, whichever is later
Thus, it is evident that the penalty order was passed we// within time as prescribed under Section 275 of the Income Tax Act.
18. It is submitted that in reply para h, the subject matter ie the validity of the notice u/s 271AAB has reached finality, order u/s 271AAB is passed within the time limit.
19. It is submitted that in reply to para l, it is to be noted that validity of assumption of revision jurisdiction do not affect the instant order imposing penalty u/s 271 AAB of the Act as the Hontble ITAT stated that the penalty notice u/s 271AAB issued on 11.12.2018 is a valid one.
20. It is submitted that in reply to para j, the objection of the petitioner has been considered but rejected on valid ground, which is apparent from the order u/s 271AAB dated 30.06.2022.
21. It is submitted that in reply to para k & l, it is to be noted that validity of assumption of revision jurisdiction do not affect the instant order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act. Further, it is pertinent to mention that the penalty was initiated in the Assessment order itself. The facts of the case is distinguishable from the case law R. P. Dharmalingam as in that case penalty proceedings was dropped by the AO whereas in this case penalty u/s 271AAB was kept in abeyance till the matter reaches finality.
Page No: 6 Corrns: (2)
22. to para m, the order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB is well within the time Prescribed u/s 275(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which is reproduced below for ready reference.
Bar of li177itation for invosing penalties.
275. No order imposing a Penalty under this Chapter shall be passed161(a) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subjectmatter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 L[or section 24641 or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed!?, or six months from the end of the month in which the order of the 20(***] Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Appellate Tribunal is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, whichever period expires later:
Provided that in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject-matter of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 246 or section 246A, and the Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003 disposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or within one year from the end of the financial year in which the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, whichever is later
23. It is submitted that in reply to para n, the objection/reply is duly rebutted while imposing penalty u/s 271AAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961
24. It is submitted that in reply to para o, till the date of passing order by the Hon’ble I TAT vide ITA NO.3367/Chny/2018 on 22.12.2021, Assessment Order dated 30.12.2017 was subject to dispute. The imposition of penalty is purely on
Page No: 7 Corrns:
B, l.R.s.
come-Tax
-2

31
the basis of TAT order dated 22 12.2021 by which the contested issues in the
order reached finality• It is no Way COnnected to the assumption of

jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. of
25 It is subnlitted that in reply to para P’ Objections of the petitioner is duly addressed while passing order ws 271 AAB of the Act, 1961
26 is submitted that in reply to para q, order dated 30 06.2022 is well
within the time limit and is sustainable in court of law It th
27 It is submitted that in reply to para r, since the Assessment Order dated
30.12.2017 was subjected to appeal, which reached finality by I TAT order dated 22.12.2021. Subsequently, within 6 months order imposing penalty was passed on 30.06.2022.
28. It is submitted that in reply to para 20, order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB dated 30.06.2022 is well within the time limit and as per law and hence the Honble High Court is requested that the order dated 30.06.2022 may be allowed to proceeded with and the petitioner may be directed to file appeal before the CIT(A).
29. It is submitted that in reply to para 22, the petitioner is free to challenge the order before the CIT(A), however he chose to challenge before the Hon’ble High Court. Therefore, it is requested that petitioner may be directed to file appeal before the CIT(A).
30. It is submitted that in reply to para 24, it is submitted that order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB dated 30.06.2022 is well within the time limit and as per law and hence the petitioner may be directed to file appeal before the CIT(A).
B, IRS. Page No: 8 Corrns:
(2)

31. to para 25, the impugned order dated
30.06.2022 is passed as per law
32. It is submitted that in reply to para 26, considering the fact that order passed is well within the time limit, the Department may be allowed operation

33. It is submitted that in reply to para 27, the order imposing penalty u/s 271AAB dated 30 06.2022 is well within the time limit and as per law.
It is respectfully prayed that this Hon*ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the writ petition as devoid of merits and thus render justice.

Solemnly affirmed at Chennai -34. / Chennai -34.
on this 23rd day of Sep 2022 and signed his name in my presence Before Me
Advocate: Chennai
Tax Page No: 9 Corrns:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT MADARS
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
W.P.N0. 21006 of 2022
Chandrasekaran Joseph Jay
Villa 105, 3rd Avenue, Panaiyur, Chennai 600 019 PAN: AABPV3488N.
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 2(2),
Income Tax Department,
108, Nungambakkam High
Nungambakkam
Chennai — 600 -034 and 2
COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED FIRST RESPONDENT
M/S. A.P.SRINIVAS
[E.No. 936 1
SENIOR STANDING
FOR CUSTOMS, CENTRAL
SERVICE TAX
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT
[Ph. 94444 68650]