Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO

106 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1977#138 most cited

What is Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The principle of finality dictates that stale issues should not be reactivated, and lapse of time brings repose to judicial and quasi-judicial controversies. A Commissioner cannot substitute their judgment for the Assessing Officer's unless the assessment order is legally erroneous, not merely less elaborate, thus limiting revisionary powers under Section 263.

486

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 1991 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO · Parashuram Pottery · Section 263 · erroneous order · revision power · substitution of Commissioner's judgment · finality of assessment · stale issues · judicial precedent · 106 ITR 1

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO

MATA BALA SUNDRI RICE MILL,VILLAGE KANIPLA, DISTRICT YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-3, YAMUNA NAGAR, YAMUNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 906/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mata Bala Sundri Rice Mill, The Ito, C/O Jagdamba Rice & General Mills, Vs Ward-3, Village-Kanipla, Po-Sarawan, Yamuna Nagar. Yamuna Nagar. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aatfm9813G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhruv Goel, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…e all material facts fully and truly. In support of his contention, he relied upon a large number of decisions, namely, Duli Chand Singhania Vs ACIT 269 ITR 192 (P&H) and NDTV Vs DCIT 424 ITR 607 (S.C.), Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer 106 ITR 1. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand relied upon the orders of Revenue Authorities and submitted that AO got an information that assessee has not disclosed the sale of broken rice which was a bye-product during hulling the rice. Hence, AO has rightly reopened the assessment. 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record…

ELECTRIC LAMP AND COMPONENT MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the appellant society is allowed

ITA 4309/DEL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalelectric Lamp & Component Cit (Exemption) Manufacturers Association Of Delhi. India, Vs. (Civic Centre Minto Road, C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. Delhi-110002). G-8/5 Sector-11, Opposite Sfs Apartment, Rohini, Delhi-110085. Pan-Aaate0234A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Department By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Dated 30.06.2025 Passed U/S 12Ab(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ In Short) Rejecting The Registration Applied By The Assessee U/S 12A Of The Act For The Period From Assessment Years 2021-22 To 2025-26. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Society Was Incorporated On 29.06.1970 & Registered U/S 12A Of The Act In Terms Of Registration Certificate Issued On 30.09.1986. Thereafter, Assessment For Assessment Years 2013-14 & Electric Lamp & Component Manufacturers Association Of India Vs. Ito 2015-16 Were Completed On 29.03.2016 & 11.12.2017 Respectively, Wherein Assessee Was Allowed Exemption U/S 12A Of The Act. The Assessee Was Granted Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Act For Assessment Year 2021-12 To 2023-24 Vide Order Dated 27.05.2021, Thereafter, Assessee Applied For Permanent Approval U/S 12A Which Was Rejected By Ld. Cit(E) Vide Order Dated 30.06.2025 & Further Cancel The Provisional Registration Granted From Assessment Year Onwards.

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Electric Lamp and Component CIT (Exemption) Manufacturers Association of Delhi. India, Vs. (Civic Centre Minto Road, C/o Kapil Goel, Adv. Delhi-110002). G-8/5 Sector-11, Opposite SFS Apartment, Rohini, Delhi-110085. PAN-AAATE0234A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Department by Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: The present appeal is filed by th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BANDHAN FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1139/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata..……………… ……………...……….……….……Appellant Vs. Bandhan Financial Services Ltd....………………………….......……...…..…..Respondent Dn 32 Salt Lake, Salt Lake City, Sech Bhawan, S.O Salt Lake, Kol-700091. [Pan: Aabcg0611R] Appearances By: Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Biswanath Paul, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 11, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.06.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 56 Days. The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…dhan Financial Services Ltd sustained for multiple years, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year." 5.2.14. Reliance is again placed in the case of 'Parashuram Pottery Works Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC)', where, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held the following: "It appears from the record that in several assessment years, the Revenue accepted the order of the Tribunal in favour of the assessee and did not pursue the matter any further but in respect of some assessment years the matter was taken up in appeal before the Bombay High Court but wi…

Showing 120 of 486 · Page 1 of 25

...