← 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

DCIT, Central Circle 1(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Navratna Organisers and Developers Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 895/AHD/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2007-08. Cross Objection is filed by the assessee as against the above Revenue appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case is that assessee engaged in the business

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Amb Homes Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2749/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekito, Ward 1 (1), Vs. M/S. Amb Homes Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. D-62, Ground Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi – 110 024. (Pan : Aagca4596C) Co No.152/Del/2017 (In Ita No.2749/Del/2017) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Amb Homes Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), D-62, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Defence Colony, New Delhi – 110 024. (Pan : Aagca4596C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.12.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi [Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)Section 14ASection 68

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi [hereinafter 2 CO No.152/Del/2017 referred to ‘Ld. CIT (A)’] dated 28.02.2017 and assessee has also filed cross objection for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed its return of income declaring loss of Rs.18 ... ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.” 9 CO No.152/Del/2017 6. Assessee has also filed cross objections received following grounds of appeals :- “1. That the Ld. Assessing Officer as well as CIT (Appeal) has erred while upholding the addition of Rs.100 lacs

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Jyoti Patodia, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is also dismissed being infructuous

ITA 1432/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

Siddarth Jhajharia, FCA For the Revenue Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR ORDER Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM Theappeal filed by the revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee areagainst theorder of Ld. CIT(A), Kolkata-27dated 07.03.2024for AY 2015-16 arising out of assessment order passed ... inclined to dismiss the appeal of the revenue by upholding the order of Ld. CIT(A). Appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 5. Cross Objection of the assessee is in support of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and is accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. 6. In the result, appeal

Income Tax Officer-4(3)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan, M K Road vs. Vishal Fashion Private Limited (Earlier Known As M/Raj Ratan Infracon Private Limited), Mumbai

Accordingly the CO of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3893/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

No.3893/Mum/2023 & C.O. No. 239/Mum/2024 Vishal Fashion Pvt. Ltd. O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: This appeal by the revenue and the Cross Objections (CO) of the assessee are against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short

Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward -19(6), Chennai vs. Smt. Kavitha Subbrarayalu, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross-

ITA 1277/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.G. Akash, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1277/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Cross-Objection No.54/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 v. The ITO, Smt. Kavitha Subbrarayalu, NCW-19(6), No.38/96, Pudupet Street, Chennai. Alandur, Chennai ... /Date of Pronouncement : 04.12.2024 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Multi Commodity Exchange Investor Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3262/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

revenue for assessment year 2016 – 17, 2019 – 20 and 2020 – 21. 017. As we have already dismissed the appeal of the revenue, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous, therefore those are also dismissed.” Since identical issue was dealt with by the Tribunal as discussed therefore there

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Multi Commodity Exchange Investor Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3198/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

revenue for assessment year 2016 – 17, 2019 – 20 and 2020 – 21. 017. As we have already dismissed the appeal of the revenue, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous, therefore those are also dismissed.” Since identical issue was dealt with by the Tribunal as discussed therefore there

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Multi Commodity Exchange Investor Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3197/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

revenue for assessment year 2016 – 17, 2019 – 20 and 2020 – 21. 017. As we have already dismissed the appeal of the revenue, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous, therefore those are also dismissed.” Since identical issue was dealt with by the Tribunal as discussed therefore there

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Multi Commodity Exchange Investor Protection Fund, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3195/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

revenue for assessment year 2016 – 17, 2019 – 20 and 2020 – 21. 017. As we have already dismissed the appeal of the revenue, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous, therefore those are also dismissed.” Since identical issue was dealt with by the Tribunal as discussed therefore there

JCIT, (OSD) CC-1, Noida vs. IV County Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1357/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

JCIT, (OSD) CC-1, Noida vs. Country Infrastructures Private Limited, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1356/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

DCIT, CC-1, Noida vs. Aba Builders Ltd., Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1351/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

IV County Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1172/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

IV County Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1171/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

Country Infrastructures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1168/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

Country Infrastructures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1167/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

Country Infrastructures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1166/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

Country Infrastructure Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, CC-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1165/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. M/S. Aba Builders Ltd, Central Circle-1, Noida A-39, Sector-63, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacca1410H Jcit (Osd), Vs. Iv County Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-I, A-39, Sector-63, Noida, Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aacci9503M

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jhan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

Date of Hearing 10/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 04/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals and Cross objection are filed by the different assessees and the revenue against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these ... Officer, DCIT, Central Circle-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 5.1 One of the main ground raised by the assessee in its cross objection is non-existence of incriminating material found during the search for making the addition by the ld AO. Since, this issue goes

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Banas Builders and Developers LLP, Jhalawar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 269/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Jain (Adv.) (V.C)For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR (V.H)
Section 153ASection 250Section 69B

named Banas Minerals Private Limited in ITA no. 239/JPR/2024 filed by the revenue and against that appeal so filed by the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee no. 4/JP/2024. That dispute relates to the assessment year 2013-14. Both the appeal of the revenue and that ... cross objection of the assessee arise because of an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur-2 [ for short CIT(A) ] passed as per provision of section 250 of the Income tax Act [ for short Act ] on 22.12.2023. That order of the ld. CIT(A) arise because

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Banas Minerals Private Limited, Jhalawar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 240/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Jain (Adv.) (V.C)For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR (V.H)
Section 153ASection 250Section 69B

named Banas Minerals Private Limited in ITA no. 239/JPR/2024 filed by the revenue and against that appeal so filed by the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee no. 4/JP/2024. That dispute relates to the assessment year 2013-14. Both the appeal of the revenue and that ... cross objection of the assessee arise because of an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur-2 [ for short CIT(A) ] passed as per provision of section 250 of the Income tax Act [ for short Act ] on 22.12.2023. That order of the ld. CIT(A) arise because