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 367,154 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 147Section 148Section 263Section 142(1)Section 151Section 69CSection 68
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

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

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

Shapoorji Pallanji and Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3053/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacs6994C

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…il contrary facts are brought on record by the Revenue, no U-turn is permissible. The learned Assessing Officer is bound by rule of consistency. The ratio laid down in following cases supports the case of the assessee:- i. Parshuram Pottery Works Ltd. vs ITO 106 ITR 1 (SC) ii. CIT vs A.R.J. 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. Un…

M/S. Oakland Bottlers (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5566/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 5566/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 M/S Oakland Bottlers (P) Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 10/46A, West Punujabi Bagh, Ward-13(4), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaac)4250B Assessee By : Sh. Gautam Jain, Ca & Sh. P. K. Kamal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.07.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xvi, Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80I

…stion of reopening and revisiting the same issue again in subsequent years would not arise. This is based on the principle that there should be finality in all legal proceedings. The Supreme Court in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 had held as under:- ".....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 10 Oakland Bottlers (P) Ltd. must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi- judicial controversies as it must in other spheres o…

M/S. Caprihan Auto Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4935/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. R.S. Singhvi & Sh. SatyajeetFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 44A

…sted. It is a principle of law that this cannot be permitted, and there is abundant authority reiterating that principle." 8. The Court reiterated the following observation made by it in Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. vs. ITO. 1977 CTR (SC) 32 : (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC) : "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 of…

M/S Hero Honda Motors Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…be any point of finality in the legal Hero Honda Motors Ltd V DCIT 2148/del/2009 A Y 2004-05 Appeal Against Order u/s 263 of The ACT Page 31 of 34 proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivated beyond a particular stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasijudicial controversies as it must in other spheres of human activity. 20. Further clause (a) of Explanation states that an order shall…

Vikas Oil Mill, Jaipur vs. CIT, Alwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular stage and the 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. 20. Further clause (a) of Explanation states that an order…

S. Mansukhlal & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4793/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4793/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S. S. Mansukhlal & Co., The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Srbc & Associates Llp, Of Income Tax –14(2), V. Chartered Accountants, Earnest House, Iii Floor, 12 Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai – 400 021. Dadar (West), Mumbai – 400 028. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahfs9459A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ersed. In that case also a defendant is bound by the judgment, although it may be true enough that subsequent light or ingenuity might suggest some traverse which had not been taken." 30. Reference was also made to Parashuram Pottery Works Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC) and then it was held: "We are aware of the fact that strictly speaking res judicata does not apply to income-tax proceedings. Again, each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found as a fact one way…

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2153/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2151 & 2153/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09)

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…) (v) CIT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 (vi) CIT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 fTR 653 (vii) CIT v. Amritaben Shah - 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. fTO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)" Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 47,22,282/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and submission of the assessee and the orders of the A.O. observed that the earlier search…

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2151/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2151 & 2153/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09)

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…) (v) CIT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 (vi) CIT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 fTR 653 (vii) CIT v. Amritaben Shah - 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. fTO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)" Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 47,22,282/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after considering the facts of the case and submission of the assessee and the orders of the A.O. observed that the earlier search…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1162/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Trent Ltd., Dcit-Range-2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaacl 1838 J आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1725/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 वष" Dcit-Range-2(3) Trent Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 06/12/2010 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai The Assessing Officer(Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Retailing For Ready- Made Garments Etc.Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 27.10.2005,Declaring Total Income At Rs. 12.75 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3)Of The Act, On 05.10.2007,Determining Its Income At Rs. Nil,After Setting Off Loss Of The Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23Section 24Section 254(1)

…re is no reason for us to take a different view unless there are very convincing reasons, none of which have been pointed out by the learned counsel for the Revenue. XXXXXXXXXXXXXX 30.Reference was also made to Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC) and then it was held (page 329 of 193 ITR) : "We are aware of the fact that strictly speaking res judicata does not apply to Income-tax proceedings. Again, each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Upinder Kumar Widhani, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4402/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 226(3)

…f he chooses to Page 4 of 5 I.T.A .No.-4402/Del/2014 ignore the same then he does so at his peril. The AO cannot be said to be aggrieved by his own repeated inactions. It may not be out of context to quote from Parashuram Pottery Works Co.Ltd. vs ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC) wherein their Lordships were very categoric in holding 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-versed with the law on the…

A.C.I.T.19(2), Mumbai vs. Alka Kiritkumar Upadhyay, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 2617/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2617/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) A.C.I.T. – 19(2), Smt. Alka Kiritkumar बनाम/ Room No. 315, 3 Rd Floor, Upadhyay, V. Piramal Chambers, Alka Bldg., 6T H Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400 012. Mumbai –400 054. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaapu0228Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…of the assessee. 2.5. So far as, the issue of consistency is concerned, we are of the view that in the absence of contrary material, consistency has to be maintained. For which we are fortified by following decisions:- 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…

M/S Om Welfare Society, Hisar vs. ITO, Hisar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1583/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…opinion and as such the reopening was bad in law. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) " CIT Vs Usha International Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 485 (SC) " Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. Vs ITO 106 ITR 1 (SC) 8. The ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the AO wrongly alleged that the assessee did not respond to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, our attention was drawn towards page no. 38 of the assessee’s 9 Om Welfare Society paper book and it was submitted that a letter dated 26.12.2012 was written to the AO stating therein that the retu…

Ashok Arora, New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3024/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 132Section 142Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 22(2)(e)Section 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. vs. ITO, (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC)].” It was further observed as under:- "From the aforesaid definitions as 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…

M/S. Enfield Gems & Jewellery Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-I, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 33/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 41(1)

…ion. It is an important decision and the same cannot be based on the whims or caprice of the revising authority. There must be materials available from records called for by the Commissioner.—Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. vs. ITO 1977 CTR (SC) 32 : (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC), Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ITO 1977 CTR (AP) 138 : (1978) 114 ITR 404 (AP), Dawjee Dadabhoy & Co. vs. S.P. Jain & Anr. (1957) 31 ITR 872 (Cal) and Russell Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. A. Chowdhury, Addl. CIT (1977) 109 ITR 229 (Cal) relied on Conclusion : In order to exercise jurisdiction under s. 263, Commissioner must have material to prima f…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2756/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2755/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2754/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2753/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2752/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…

Sterling Biotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 1, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 2751/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manjunathaswamy
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…nserting Explanation 2 to sec. 263 of the Act, since it would lead to unending litigations and there would not be any point of finality in the legal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd Vs. ITO (1977)(106 ITR 1) that there must be a point of finality in all legal proceedings and the stale issues should not be reactivitated beyond a particular ITA Nos.2750 to 2756/Mum/16 A.Ys. 06-07 to 12-13 [Sterling Biotech Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT] Page 33 stage and the lapse of time must induce repose in and set at rest judicial and quasi-judicial controversies as it must in o…