cross objection — 4,331 case laws

DCIT (It) – 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jefferies Singapore Limited, Singapore

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3042/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, A/R (appeared virtually)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 68Section 69C

Pronouncement: 30/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: I.T.A. No. 3042/Mum/2025 & C.O. No. 140/Mum/2025, are appeals and the cross objection by the assessee preferred against the I.T.A. No. 3042/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 140/Mum/2025 2 order of ld. CIT(A)-48, Mumbai dated 28/02/2025 pertaining ... payments were made Jar obtaining accommodation entries in the form of bogus Long-Term Capital Gains rather than legitimate brokerage service.” 3. Grounds of cross-objections raised by the assessee are as under:- “1. The whole assessment is invalid and liable to be annulled as no notice

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Karur vs. Karur Govindaraj Raajesh Krishna, Karur

ITA 1403/CHNY/2024[2012]Status: FixedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1403/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer, Karur Govindaraj Raajesh Ward-1, Krishna, Karur. Vs. 10, Avs & Avr Colony, Chinnandankoil Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Ahzpr 3034M]

For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Karur Govindaraj Raajesh Ward-1, Krishna, Karur. Vs. 10, AVS & AVR Colony, Chinnandankoil Road, Karur – 639 002. [PAN: AHZPR 3034M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Cross Objection No.19/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Karur Govindaraj Raajesh Krishna, The Income Tax Officer, 10, AVS & AVR Colony, Vs. Ward-1, Chinnandankoil Road ... Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 ITA No.1403/Chny/2024 & CO No.19/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre

ACIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Orbit Financial Capital, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5812/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 147

Orbit Financial Capital आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the assessee against order dated 13/09/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B for the A.Y.2015-16 ... Hexaware Technologies Limited, and SLP has been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court Vide Diary Number: 37843/2024 on 21.08.2024 ?" 3. Whereas, in Cross Objection, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- 5 & C. O. No.287/M/2024 M/s. Orbit Financial Capital “1 Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT(It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2342/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Krishna Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee, arise out of separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), pertaining to the assessment ... 103/Mum/2024 Jefferies International Ltd. 2. Since, the appeals relate to the same assessee and issues arising in appeals and cross objections are identical, they have been clubbed together and disposed of in a consolidated order, as a matter of convenience. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing

DCIT(It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2341/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Krishna Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee, arise out of separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), pertaining to the assessment ... 103/Mum/2024 Jefferies International Ltd. 2. Since, the appeals relate to the same assessee and issues arising in appeals and cross objections are identical, they have been clubbed together and disposed of in a consolidated order, as a matter of convenience. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1775/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Krishna Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee, arise out of separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), pertaining to the assessment ... 103/Mum/2024 Jefferies International Ltd. 2. Since, the appeals relate to the same assessee and issues arising in appeals and cross objections are identical, they have been clubbed together and disposed of in a consolidated order, as a matter of convenience. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(It)-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Jefferies International Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1774/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

Krishna Kumar Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee, arise out of separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), pertaining to the assessment ... 103/Mum/2024 Jefferies International Ltd. 2. Since, the appeals relate to the same assessee and issues arising in appeals and cross objections are identical, they have been clubbed together and disposed of in a consolidated order, as a matter of convenience. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, Kochi vs. Maj Hospital, Edapally

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 576/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit (Exemptions) .......... Appellant 4Th Floor, Aayakr Bhavan Old Railway Station Road Ernakulam 682018 Vs. Maj Hospital .......... Respondent Church Road, Edapally Ernakulam 682024 [Pan: Aabtm0661Q]

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Jose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

Therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) is reversed and the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. 7. The Cross Objection raised by the assessee is in support of the order of the CIT(A). Therefore, the cross object becomes infructuous, hence dismissed. 5 ITA 576/C/2024& CO 8/C/24 ... Hospital 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th December, 2024 (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 30th December, 2024 n.p. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent

Ala Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.No.R 321, Kodungallur vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhavan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed with respect to the issue agitated before us

ITA 586/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.C.A.Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

allow ability of expenses attributable to the interest income for the reason that the Revenue has not come up in appeal or filed any cross objection before us. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed with respect to the issue agitated before us. Order pronounced

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Taj Kerala Hotels & Resorts Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 93/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Avneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40A(2)(b)

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi [CIT(A)] dated 04.11.2019 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 & 2014-15. 2. The assessee filed Cross Objections in support of the order of the CIT(A). 3. Since common facts and identical issues are involved in both the appeals, we proceed ... reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 13. The above findings are mutatis mutandis applicable to the appeal in ITA No. 93/Coch/2020. 14. The cross objections are filed by the assessee are in support of the order of the CIT(A). Therefore, the cross objections becomes infructuous and hence dismissed

The ACIT, Ernakulam vs. M/S.Taj Kerala Hotels & Resorts Ltd, Kochi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 92/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Avneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40A(2)(b)

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi [CIT(A)] dated 04.11.2019 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 & 2014-15. 2. The assessee filed Cross Objections in support of the order of the CIT(A). 3. Since common facts and identical issues are involved in both the appeals, we proceed ... reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 13. The above findings are mutatis mutandis applicable to the appeal in ITA No. 93/Coch/2020. 14. The cross objections are filed by the assessee are in support of the order of the CIT(A). Therefore, the cross objections becomes infructuous and hence dismissed

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. Rashtrotthana Parishat, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1666/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017=18

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Sri Prakash Shridhar Hegde, CA

Section 11Section 11(6)Section 250Section 270ASection 274

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has not filed any cross objections (CO) against this appeal filed by the Revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: - Dcit(E), Circle-1, Bengaluru Page ... observed by the AO, the assessee submitted that depreciation on assets has not been claimed as application of Income. 9.9 Considering that no cross objection (CO) being filed by the assessee & also considering the totality of the facts of the case & by relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court

DCIT Circle-19(1), New Delhi vs. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous

ITA 1990/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1988 To 1990/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Circle-19(1), 19, Rajendra Park, New Delhi. D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C Co Nos.84 & 85/Del/2023 (Ita No.1989 & 1990/Del/2020) Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 19, Rajendra Park, Circle-19(1), D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, New Delhi Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate & Shri Gaurav Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2024 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR

Section 142Section 143(3)

referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). The assessee has filed Cross Objections for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals involve common question of law and facts therefore are taken up together for hearing ... years before us. Thus there is no reason to interfere in the orders of ld. CIT(A), for the respective AYs, before us. The cross-objections are consequential and supportive. So need no separate adjudication on these questions of law. 9. Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous. Order pronounced

DCIT Circle-19(1), New Delhi vs. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous

ITA 1988/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1988 To 1990/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Circle-19(1), 19, Rajendra Park, New Delhi. D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C Co Nos.84 & 85/Del/2023 (Ita No.1989 & 1990/Del/2020) Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 19, Rajendra Park, Circle-19(1), D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, New Delhi Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate & Shri Gaurav Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2024 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR

Section 142Section 143(3)

referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). The assessee has filed Cross Objections for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals involve common question of law and facts therefore are taken up together for hearing ... years before us. Thus there is no reason to interfere in the orders of ld. CIT(A), for the respective AYs, before us. The cross-objections are consequential and supportive. So need no separate adjudication on these questions of law. 9. Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous. Order pronounced

ITO Ward - 2, Karnal vs. Hardeep Singh, Karnal

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

ITA 1152/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1152/िद"ी/2020(िन.व. 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Ward-2, Karnal, Haryana 132001 बनाम Vs. Hardeep Singh, S/O Jaswant Singh, Vill. Kutail, Po Darar, Karnal, Haryana 132001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Exups 8061 N Co No. 150/Del/2023 (A.Y.2011-12) In Ita No. 1152/Del/2020 Hardeep Singh, S/O Jaswant Singh, Vill. Kutail, Po Darar, Karnal, Haryana 132001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Exups 8061 N बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Ward-2, Karnal, Haryana 132001 Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain, Aman Garg, Advocates & Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Chartered Accountant Department By: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 13/12/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 27/12/2024

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain, Aman Garg, Advocates &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Karnal (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)’) dated 24.01.2020, for assessment year 2011-12. The assessee has filed Cross Objections in the said appeal by Revenue. 2. The facts of the case as emanating from records are; Notice u/s. 148 of Income ... hence, appeal of Revenue is dismissed. 9 ITA No. 1152/Del/2020 & CO 15/Del/2023 (AY 2011-12) 10. The assessee has filed cross objections supporting the order of CIT(A). Since, we have dismissed appeal of the Revenue, the cross objections filed by the assessee have become infructuous and the same