Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd. v. Income Tax Department

436 ITR 469Reported decision2021#15857 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 159Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 148a(c)section 69dsection 148(2)section 149(1)(b)approval under section 151non application of mindorder under section 148a(d)section 69blive linkspecified authoritysection 292bsection 127

Judgments citing Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd. v. Income Tax Department

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2309/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

…of CIT(A), so present case stands on stronger footing where no provision is referred at any stage. 6.1 In this context, as relied by ld. Counsel, we find that Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in case of Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd vs Income Tax Department 436 ITR 469, has held as follows:- “As stated herein above that the recorded reason/impugned Assessment Order is silent under which provision of the Act the additions are sought to be made. It is well settled that the reasons cannot be supplemented by assessment Order or Affidavit. The recorded reason is totally silent whether the amount sought to be taxed…

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 13, Delhi

ITA 2308/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

…of CIT(A), so present case stands on stronger footing where no provision is referred at any stage. 6.1 In this context, as relied by ld. Counsel, we find that Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in case of Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd vs Income Tax Department 436 ITR 469, has held as follows:- “As stated herein above that the recorded reason/impugned Assessment Order is silent under which provision of the Act the additions are sought to be made. It is well settled that the reasons cannot be supplemented by assessment Order or Affidavit. The recorded reason is totally silent whether the amount sought to be taxed…

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, Delhi

ITA 2306/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

…of CIT(A), so present case stands on stronger footing where no provision is referred at any stage. 6.1 In this context, as relied by ld. Counsel, we find that Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in case of Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd vs Income Tax Department 436 ITR 469, has held as follows:- “As stated herein above that the recorded reason/impugned Assessment Order is silent under which provision of the Act the additions are sought to be made. It is well settled that the reasons cannot be supplemented by assessment Order or Affidavit. The recorded reason is totally silent whether the amount sought to be taxed…

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2305/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

…of CIT(A), so present case stands on stronger footing where no provision is referred at any stage. 6.1 In this context, as relied by ld. Counsel, we find that Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in case of Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd vs Income Tax Department 436 ITR 469, has held as follows:- “As stated herein above that the recorded reason/impugned Assessment Order is silent under which provision of the Act the additions are sought to be made. It is well settled that the reasons cannot be supplemented by assessment Order or Affidavit. The recorded reason is totally silent whether the amount sought to be taxed…

Income Tax Officer Ward -2 (1), Amritsar vs. Ms. Savita Bansal, Through Legal Heir Sh. Parveen Kumar Bansal, Amritsar

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 240/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 240/Asr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Income Tax Officer Smt. Savita Bansal Ward-2(1) बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Amritsar 143001 H.No. 272, Green Avenue Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No. 1/Amritsar/2024 (In Ita No. 240/Asr/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Savita Bansal Income Tax Officer बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Ward-2(1) H.No. 272, Green Avenue Amritsar 143001 Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016- 1. 17 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…burden upon a legal representative". There is no statutory requirement imposing an obligation upon legal heirs to intimate the death of the assessee. ……." 10. The above judgment was followed by this Court in Mrs. Sripathi Subbaraya Manohara v. Pr. CIT [2021] 436 ITR 469. 11. In the present case as admitted by the Respondent the facts are admitted. The death of the Assessee was duly communicated by his legal heirs (the Petitioner herein). The ITR also duly disclosed that the same has been filed by the legal representative. However, in ignorance of the said facts available on the record the scrutiny proceedings ha…

Nirmal Kumar (As Legal Heir/Representative of Late Mishrilal Sharnickraj), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1191/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Shirish C. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e tax burden upon a legal representative". There is no statutory requirement imposing an obligation upon legal heirs to intimate the death of the assessee. 10. The above judgment was followed by this Court in Mrs. Sripathi Subbaraya Manohara v. Pr. CIT [2021] 436 ITR 469. 11. In the present case as admitted by the Respondent the facts are admitted. The death of the Assessee was duly communicated by his legal heirs (the Petitioner herein). The ITR also duly disclosed that the same has been filed by the legal representative. However, in ignorance of the said facts available on the record the scrutiny proceedings ha…

Pasari Casting & Rolling Mills Ltd. v. Income Tax Department (436 ITR 469) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax