← All Phrases

“cross objection”

AppealsSection 253(4)Section 253(4)4,331 judgments

The decision most relied on for cross objection is Sanjay Sawhney v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (116 Taxmann.com 701), cited in 87 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on cross objection

Sanjay Sawhney v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax
116 Taxmann.com 701 · 2020 · High Court
87
citing judgments

Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules allows a respondent to defend a favourable order of the CIT(A) by raising grounds decided against them, even without filing an appeal or cross-objection. Such issues can be raised orally and for the first time before the Tribunal.

DCIT v. Turquoise Investment & Finance Ltd.
378 ITR 693 · 2015 · High Court
68
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit additional grounds of appeal, especially when they are legal in nature, and allows for filing cross-objections before the Tribunal where facts are on record.

Pr. CIT v. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd.
86 Taxmann.com 148 · 2017 · High Court
54
citing judgments

A respondent in an appeal before the Tribunal can support the order appealed against on any grounds decided against them, even without filing a cross-objection, under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules.

Peter Vaz v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bangalore
128 Taxmann.com 180 · 2021 · High Court
34
citing judgments

An assessee can raise an objection regarding the validity of the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction for reopening a concluded assessment even if the issue was not raised before the CIT(Appeals), by invoking Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963. This is permissible if the issue is ancillary to the main issue and does not require additional evidence.

Dahod Sahakari Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. v. CIT
282 ITR 321 · 2006 · High Court
31
citing judgments

An assessee-respondent can support an appellate order on any ground available to them, even if they haven't filed cross-objections, provided the new ground is a point of law and doesn't require fresh evidence.

Mavany Brothers v. CIT, Panjim
62 Taxmann.com 50 · 2015 · High Court
25
citing judgments

A delay in filing cross-objections can be condoned if there are bonafide reasons and no mala-fide conduct or lackadaisical approach by the assessee.

CIT v. New India Assurance Company Ltd.
234 ITR 663 · 1998 · High Court
23
citing judgments

A cross objection filed by an assessee against an order of the CIT(A) can be considered as an appeal by the assessee.

CIT(E) v. Jamiatul Banaat Tankaria
168 Taxmann.com 35 · 2024 · High Court
20
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) cannot invoke Section 13(1)(b) at the stage of granting registration under Section 12AB, especially when the assessee has a valid registration. Section 13(1)(b) is only attracted after the assessee has crossed the hurdle of being eligible for exemption under Section 11 by obtaining registration.

Judgments citing cross objection

Vipul Mittal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2850/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 153A

Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: These are appeals and Cross Objections preferred by both the Revenue as well as the Assessees against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-III, Delhi, (hereinafter referred ... these appeals, by way of application under Rule 11 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 or by way of filing Cross Objections, the grounds have been raised. As for ITAs No.5590/Del/2011 & other 20 appeals and 6 COs filed by the assessees (Nimitaya Properties Ltd., Nimitaya Promoters

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), Delhi, I.P.Estate vs. Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services(India) Pvt. Ltd., Lajpat Nagar

ITA 3158/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/Chny/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3157/Chny2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner Of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu-621651 Vs Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan- Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2014-15] The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 Pan-Aadca9414C Assessee Revenue

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 PAN-AADCA9414C Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.63/CHNY/2018 (Arising out of ITA No.3157/CHNY2017) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] M/s Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu ... Dalmiapuram, Williams Road, Vs Tamilnadu, 621651 Cantonment, Trichy, Tamil Nadu-620001 PAN-AADCA9414C Assessee Revenue ITA Nos. 5416 & 5417/Del/2017 along with other cases Cross Objection No.64/CHNY/2018 (Arising out of ITA No.3157/CHNY/2017) [Assessment Year: 2014-15] M/s Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner of Dalmiapuram, Income Tax, Circle-1, Tamilnadu

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Non-Corporate Circle vs. Akmg Alloys Private Ltd., Dindigul

In the result, Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and

ITA 873/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement –
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.873/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 v. The DCIT, M/s. AKMG Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Non Corporate Circle-2, No.72, West Car Street ... /Date of Pronouncement : 10.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue and Cross-Objection filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter in short ‘the Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated

ACIT, Coporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. J-Ark Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Taewoong Logistics Pvt Ltd.), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 17/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.17/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 & C.O. No. 116/Chny/2018 [In Ita No. 17/Chny/2018] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. J-Ark Logistics (P) Ltd., Income Tax, (Formerly Known As Taewoong Corporate Circle 3(1), Logistics (P) Ltd),South Side, Eastern Chennai. Wing, 7Th Floor, Kattima Isana Building, 497 & 498, Poonamalle High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. [Pan: Aadct0692D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Raghunathan, Advocate & Shri S. Sankara Narayanan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.09.2017 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Before Adverting To The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue, We Note That The Issue Raised In This Appeal Has To Be Decided In Terms Of The Order Dated 05.08.2024 Of Special Bench In Assessee’S Own Case.

For Appellant: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Raghunathan, Advocate &
Section 194CSection 40

116/Chny/18 C.O. No. 116/Chny/2018 9. In view of our decision in remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, the Cross Objection arising out of appeal requires no adjudication being academic in nature and accordingly, the CO stands dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal filed

DCIT, Circle-14(2), New Delhi vs. Krishan Kripa Computers Industries Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 9500/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.9500/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(2), R. No. 334B, Cr Building, Ip Estate, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110002 बनाम Vs. Krishna Kirpa Computer Industries P. Ltd., Shop No.18, Rishab Ipex Shopping Mall, 1St Floor, I.P Extension, Patparganj, Near Victor Public School, New Delhi 110092 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aadck-2478-G Co No. 80/Del/2024 (A.Y.2015-16) In Ita No. 9500/Del/2019 Krishna Kirpa Computer Industries P. Ltd., Shop No.18, Rishab Ipex Shopping Mall, 1St Floor, I.P Extension, Patparganj, Near Victor Public School, New Delhi 110092 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aadck-2478-G बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14(2), R. No. 334B, Cr Building, Ip Estate, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 Assessee By : S/Shri Divyanshu Agarwal & Anubhav Rastogi, Advocates Department By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 10/01/2025

For Appellant: S/Shri Divyanshu Agarwal & Anubhav Rastogi, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Income Tax (Appeals)-5, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)’) dated 30.09.2019, for assessment year 2015-16. The assessee has filed Cross Objections in appeal filed by the Revenue. 2. Shri Divyanshu Agarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that appeal by Revenue is liable ... assessee made a statement at Bar, that since appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on account of low tax effect, he is not pressing cross objections and is withdrawing the same. Accordingly, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. 7. In the result, appeal of the Revenue

ACIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S Rana Iron & Power Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

ITA 4185/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. Pranshu Singhal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

Pronouncement: 10.11.2025 ORDER Per Bench: The instant batch of three Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 4183, 4184 & 4185/Del/2025 with assessee’s as many cross objections CO Nos. 182, 183 & 184/Del/2025, arise against the CIT(A)-29, New Delhi’s common order dated 28.03.2025, in assessment years ... between the parties stand rendered academic. 9. To sum up, these Revenue’s three appeals ITA Nos. 4183 to 4185/Del/2025 along with assessee’s cross objections CO Nos. 182 to 184/Del/2025 are dismissed; in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara vs. Jay Dushyant Patel, Vadodara

In the result, we find that Ld

ITA 981/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 90

Years –2019-20 & 2021-22 - 2– O R D E R PER BENCH: These are appeals have been filed by the Department and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT ... cases are taken up together. 2. At the outset the Counsel for the assessee submitted that we shall not be pressing for cross objection filed by him for A.Y. 2021-22 and accordingly, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee in C.O. No. 17/Ahd/2024 is being dismissed as not pressed

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara vs. Jay Dushyant Patel, Vadodara

In the result, we find that Ld

ITA 980/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 90

Years –2019-20 & 2021-22 - 2– O R D E R PER BENCH: These are appeals have been filed by the Department and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT ... cases are taken up together. 2. At the outset the Counsel for the assessee submitted that we shall not be pressing for cross objection filed by him for A.Y. 2021-22 and accordingly, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee in C.O. No. 17/Ahd/2024 is being dismissed as not pressed

DCIT, Central Circle- 1(3), Pune, Income Tax vs. Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Maharashtra

ITA 1831/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue's appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee's cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1703/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue‟s appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee‟s cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

ITA 1702/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue's appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee's cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

ITA 1701/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue's appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee's cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1700/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue‟s appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee‟s cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1699/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue‟s appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee‟s cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1698/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue‟s appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee‟s cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1697/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue‟s appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee‟s cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

Garware Technical Fibres Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Pune

ITA 1696/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: CA Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR And
Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

major portion of the disallowance. The revenue's appeal was rejected by the Tribunal, which, by the impugned order, accepted the assessee's cross objection. The threshold point which this court has to decide is whether the assessee is right in contending that since the revenue has suffered concurrent findings

DCIT CC 8.2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani, Mumbai

ITA 4348/MUM/2024[2003 04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Sunil Kumar Singh, Juducial Member Ita Nos. 4324, 4331 & 4345 To 4348/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri NimeshVoraFor Respondent: Smt. SanyogitaNagpal, (CIT, DR)
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mumbai passed under Section 250 of the Act for the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2006-07. The assessee has filed Cross Objection in all the 6 years of appeals filed by the revenue. Since, identical issue on similar facts are involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake ... Nos.4324,4331 & 4345 to 4348/M/2024 C.O. 215 to 220/M/2024 DCIT,CC-8(2) Vs. Late Shri Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani 02 and Cross Objection No. 215/Mum/2024 as lead case and its finding will be applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeals wherever it is applicable. ITA No.4331/Mum/2024

DCIT CC 8.2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani, Mumbai

ITA 4347/MUM/2024[2004 05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Sunil Kumar Singh, Juducial Member Ita Nos. 4324, 4331 & 4345 To 4348/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri NimeshVoraFor Respondent: Smt. SanyogitaNagpal, (CIT, DR)
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mumbai passed under Section 250 of the Act for the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2006-07. The assessee has filed Cross Objection in all the 6 years of appeals filed by the revenue. Since, identical issue on similar facts are involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake ... Nos.4324,4331 & 4345 to 4348/M/2024 C.O. 215 to 220/M/2024 DCIT,CC-8(2) Vs. Late Shri Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani 02 and Cross Objection No. 215/Mum/2024 as lead case and its finding will be applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeals wherever it is applicable. ITA No.4331/Mum/2024

DCIT CC 8.2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani, Mumbai

ITA 4346/MUM/2024[2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Sunil Kumar Singh, Juducial Member Ita Nos. 4324, 4331 & 4345 To 4348/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri NimeshVoraFor Respondent: Smt. SanyogitaNagpal, (CIT, DR)
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mumbai passed under Section 250 of the Act for the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2006-07. The assessee has filed Cross Objection in all the 6 years of appeals filed by the revenue. Since, identical issue on similar facts are involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake ... Nos.4324,4331 & 4345 to 4348/M/2024 C.O. 215 to 220/M/2024 DCIT,CC-8(2) Vs. Late Shri Dhirubhai Hirachand Ambani 02 and Cross Objection No. 215/Mum/2024 as lead case and its finding will be applied mutatis mutandis to the other appeals wherever it is applicable. ITA No.4331/Mum/2024