How many judgments cite Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO?

486 judgments on BharatTax cite Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO (106 ITR 1), spanning 1991 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 263, Section 142(1), Section 151.

Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO

106 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1977#143 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 367,164 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

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 263 Section 142(1)Section 151 Section 69C Section 68

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10(31a)section 100 section 76 section 142(2c)section 153b(1)(b)section 150(1)section 153b(1)rectification under section 154 section 144ba section 33(4)section 206c section 158bc

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

Avnindra Mishra, Mathura vs. ITO-1(3)(1), Mathura

The appeal is allowed

ITA 441/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No. 441/Agra/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) Shri Avnindra Mishra, Vs..ITO,-1(3)(1), 230/136, Chandralok Colony, Mathura. Krishna Nagar, Mathura.281004 (U.P.) PAN No.CDRPM5738F (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee by Shri M. M. Agarwal, AR. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing 28.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement 05.07.2018 ORDER This is assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10, taking the following effective grounds: “1. Because on due consideration of the facts, circumstances of the case, submissio…

Anita Yadav, Mathura vs. ITO -1(3)(1), Mathura

The appeal is allowed

ITA 422/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No. 422/Agra/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) Anita Yadav, W/o Dr. Sarijit Vs..ITO,-1(3)(1), Yadav B-99, Moti Kunj, Mathura, Mathura. (U.P.) PAN No.AERPY4688P (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri M. M. Agarwal, AR. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing 28.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement 04.07.2018 ORDER This is assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10, taking the following effective grounds: “1. Because on due consideration of the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions made before him a…

Batram Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Assessing Officer & Referred To Para No.4.3 Of Cit(A). The Ld. Ar Submits That The Revenue Did Not Prefer Any Appeal Against The Order Dated 12.01.2018 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Passed By This Tribunal. After Hearing Both The Parties, We Find That The Issue Is Covered By The Batram Properties Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 22Section 27

…by the judgment although it may be true enough that subsequent light or ingenuity might suggest some traverse which had not been taken". Hon'ble Supreme Court also referred to their own judgment in the case of Parash uram Pottery Works Co , Ltd. V ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC), wherein at page 10 it was stated that "01 the same time, we have to bear in mind that the policy of law is that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings, that stale issues should not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies…

Bijendra Kumar, Mathura vs. ITO-1(3)(1), Mathura

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 409/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A Nos.409 & 419/Agra/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10) Bijendra Kumar Vs..ITO,-1 (3)(1), Village Chandra Nagar, P.O. Kota Mathura. Mathura 281004 (U.P.) PAN No.CHJPK7757C (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri M. M. Agarwal, AR. Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing 28.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement 03.07.2018 ORDER This is assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10, taking the following grounds: “1. Because on due consideration of the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions made b…

Sanjay Chobey, Jhansi vs. ACIT Circle-2(3)(1), Jhansi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 140/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Acit, Circle –2(3)( 1), Dr. Sanjay Chobey, (Huf) Opp. Ware House, Shivpuri Aayakar Bhawan, Road, Nandpura, Jhansi 1090, Civil Lines, Pan : Aahhd7844 Q Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra Before : Shri A.D. Jain, Judicial Member And Shri Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2013-14 vs. ACIT, Circle –2(3)( 1), Dr. Sanjay Chobey, (HUF) Opp. Ware House, Shivpuri Aayakar Bhawan, Road, Nandpura, Jhansi 1090, Civil Lines, PAN : AAHHD7844 Q Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri P.K. Sahgal, Advocate And Shri Utsav Sahgal, C.A. Respondent by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement 02.07.2018 ORDER Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the…

Satypal Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the

ITA 3965/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, बनाम/ Ground Floor, Nariman Point, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q Assessment Year: 2010-11 Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Acit, 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Ground Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q

Section 131

…ue is analyzed with the principle of consistency, it can be said that in the absence of contrary facts/material, consistency has to be maintained, for which the ratio laid down in the following cases supports our view. i. Parshuram Pottery Works Ltd. vs ITO 106 ITR 1 (SC) ii. Security Printers 264 ITR 276(Del.) iii. CIT vs Neo Polypack Pvt. Ltd. 245 ITR 492 (Del.) iv. CWT vs Allied Finance Pvt. Ltd. 289 ITR 318 (Del.) v. Berger Paints India Ltd. vs CIT 266 ITR 99 (SC) vi. DCIT vs United Vanaspati (275 ITR 124) (AT)(Chandigarh ITAT) vii. Union of India vs Kumudini N. Dalal 249 ITR 219 (SC) viii. Union of India v…

ACIT CC 39, Mumbai vs. Satypal Jain, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the

ITA 3831/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Section 131

Ghanshyam, Mathura vs. ITO 3(2), Mathura

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 238/AGR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 151

…am satisfied that it is a fit case for reopening u/s 147”. (Paras 8 to 10) 13. Apropos the decisions cited by the ld. DR, they are dealt with as follows. In the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s Judgment in the case of ‘Parashuram 14. Pottery Works Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO’, 106 ITR 1 (SC) (relied on by both the sides, copy at APB- 109-118), the Hon’ble Apex Court held that “It has been said that the taxes are the price that we pay for civilization. If so, it is essential that those who are entrusted with the task of calculating and realizing that price should familiarize themselves with the relevant provisions and become well-…

Ghanshyam, Mathura vs. ITO 3(2), Mathura

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 129/AGR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 151

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C ”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM ITA No. 4340/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) & Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Commtel Networks Income Tax – 14(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., Room No.475, 4th Floor 23, White Castle, Aayakar Bhavan 34-35, Union Park M.K. Road Chembur, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 071 PAN/GIR No. AAACC8966G Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal Assessee by Shri P. Daniel Date of Hearing 14/06/2018 Date of Pronouncement 19/06/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): These are the appeals filed by Revenue again…

Dr.Reddy'S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we hold that the Tax Authorities were not justified in apportioning R & D expenditure and ESOP cost to the units which claimed exemption u/s 10B, 80IB and 80IC of the Act

ITA 1846/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S.P. ChidambaramFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ure to the said units. 15. During the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of ITO vs. L.M. Das (103 ITR 437) which was also reiterated in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd vs. ITO (160 ITR 1) to contend that in order to invoke the provisions of section 147 read with section 148, essentially two conditions have to be satisfied ie., (a) there should be a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and (b) such escapement of income should be on account of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly…

Dr.Reddy'S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we hold that the Tax Authorities were not justified in apportioning R & D expenditure and ESOP cost to the units which claimed exemption u/s 10B, 80IB and 80IC of the Act

ITA 1845/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S.P. ChidambaramFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Dr.Reddy'S Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we hold that the Tax Authorities were not justified in apportioning R & D expenditure and ESOP cost to the units which claimed exemption u/s 10B, 80IB and 80IC of the Act

ITA 1844/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S.P. ChidambaramFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

DCIT Cen Cir 2(3), Mumbai vs. Dhaval D Shah, Mumbai

ITA 1337/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Dhaval D. Shah Income, Central Smag House, 1St Floor, Vs. Circle2(3), Old Cgo Sarojini Road Ext., Vile Building, 8Th Floor, M.K. Parle (W) Road, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400010 Pan No. Aahps2691E Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 08/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dhaval D. Shah Dy. Commissioner Of Smag House, 1St Floor, Income, Central Vs. Sarojini Road Ext., Vile Circle2(3), Old Cgo Parle (W) Building, 8Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400010 Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahps2691E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ram Tiwari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. M.P. Lohia, Ar Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/05/2018

For Appellant: Mr. M.P. Lohia, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ram Tiwari, DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 27lSection 57

…nvalid and void in the eyes of law. Also contentions were raised stating that section 292B was inapplicable. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held as under: “21. Our attention was drawn to Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. V. ITO, Circle I, Ward A, Rajkot, (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC) which records that the Assessing Officer entrusted with the task of calculating and realizing tax should familiarize themselves with the relevant provisions and become well versed with the law on the subject. This is a salutary advice. Indeed, there have been lapses and faults resulting in the present litigation. Notice under Section 147/148 o…

ITO, Ward-13(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Calcutta Ahmedabad Carriers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1772/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2006-07 I.T.O., Ward-13(1) -Versus- M/S Calcutta Ahmedabad Kolkata Carriers Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata (Pan:Aaccc 2260 P) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl Cit For The Respondent: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl CITFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

…te that the impugned reopening has been initiated on account of assessee’s failure in furnishing fully and truly all the relevant particulars during the course of assessment as per first proviso to section 147 of the Act. Hon’ble apex court’s decision in 1997 106 ITR 1 (SC) Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. Vs ITO holds in similar circumstances that an assessee is not to be held responsible for the Assessing Officers’ remissness in not applying the statutory provision correctly. Hon’ble Gujarat high court’s decisions in [2013] 359 ITR 447 in case Kanak Fabrics Ltd vs ITO [2014] 360 ITR 496 (Guj) Gujarat Lease Fin…

Om Prakash Rasoria, Alwar vs. ITO, Alwar

ITA 46/JPR/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA and Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Seema Meena,JCIT - DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 147Section 54B

…and truly. Reliance is placed upon the following. (a) Zohar Siraj Lokhandwala vs M.G. Kamat[1994] 210 ITR 956 (Bom.) ‘’ Assessee primarily must disclose particular portions of documents which are material’’. (b) Parushuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd vs ITO [1977]106 ITR 1 (SC) © Indian Oil Corporation vs ITO [1986] 159 ITR 956 (SC) (d) Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd vs ITO [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) (e) ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) 4.10 In the above quoted cases, mainly it was held that the assessee must disclose all primary facts full and truly. The words ‘omission’ or failure to disclose fully and…

Shri Ishwarbhai Maganbhai Desai, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Patan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 90/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prasson Kabra, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 158BSection 292BSection 68

…ndu idol, but under the 1961 Act definition, there is a separate appropriate specification "every artificial juridical person.....". Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Deccan Wine & General Stores v. CIT [1977] 106 ITR 111, in which it was categorically held that an individual under the Income-tax Act, 1961 means only a human being. The issuance of a valid notice is a foundation for the validity of the re-assessment. There is a clear cut distinction between the precedent and procedure. The defect in the procedure will not normally amount to lack of jurisdiction. Th…

Mumbai District Central Co Op Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 1(1), Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3198/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 The Mumbai District Cit-1, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. M.K. Road, Mumbai Bank Bhavan Mumbai 400 020 Vs. 207, D.H. Road, Fort Mumbai 400 001 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaaam3185D यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Amar Gahlot याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B. Srinivas, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 22/03/2018

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…. P.) [1957] 31 ITR 872 (Cal) (paras 11, 12) viii. J. P. Srivastava and Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 111 ITR 326 (All) (para 16) ix. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC) (paras 9, 11) x. Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC) (para 13) 2.3. We are also expected to analyze the latest decision dated 31/07/2017 (relied upon by Ld. CIT-DR) in the case of CIT vs Ballarpur Industries Ltd.(2017) 85 taxmann.com 10 (Bom.). The relevant portion of the order is reproduced hereunder:- ―The above issue which comes for consideration is, did the Assessing Officer consider and e…

M/S Panchnath Enterprise, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Pr. Commr. of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

Appeals are allowed

ITA 139/RJT/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, CIT. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 263

…ues should not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in other spheres of human activity. (See Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC) at page 10) . . . From the aforesaid definitions it is clear that an order cannot be termed as erroneous unless it is not in accordance with law. If an Income- tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the order should have…

Pradeep Vatrana, Alwar vs. DCIT, Alwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 930/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri P. P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 54

…Alwar in same hierarchy. In this connection reference is made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Radhasaomi Satsang vs. CIT 193 ITR 321. Again the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. vs. ITO 1977 CTR 32 / (1977) 106 ITR 1 held as under: "At the same time, we have to bear in mind that the policy of law is that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings, that stale issues should not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and that lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi- judicial controversies as it must in other spheres…