Madan Mohan Punchhi, J.

1. The petitioner is a registered firm. It is an assessee under the I.T. Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1973-74, the petitioner-firm returned a certain sum as its income. The ITO, while framing the assessment made considerable additions thereto. On appeal to the AAC, the amount was reduced. On cross-appeals to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, certain additions were again made. Thus, in the quantum proceedings, the matter came finally to rest. Simultaneously, the IAC passed an order of penalty against the petitioner-firm. The petitioners appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was dismissed. The petitioner thereupon successfully sought a reference to the High Court, bearing I.T. Ref. No. 11 of 1981, which is pending. The question posed therein is to the effect, whether the IAC was legally authorised to levy penalty. The third step which the Department took is to obtain sanction from the Commissioner to prosecute the petitioner before, a criminal court under Section 277 of the I.T. Act. In the said complaint, charge having been framed against the petitioner-firm, it has approached this court to get quashed the same by invoking the inherent ju