← 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-4(1), Mumbai, Nariman Point vs. Kanakia Spaces Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the

ITA 1601/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailand Shriomkareshwar Chidaradcit, Central Circle-4(1) 1916, 19Th Floor, Nariman Point ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400021. V/S

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das – CIT DR
Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

Kanakia Spaces Pvt Ltd., ITA No.1601/Mum/2024& CO. No. 85/Mum/2024 O R D E R PER BENCH The present appeal by the Revenue and the Cross Objection by the assessee have been filed against the impugned order dated 30/01/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income ... falls under any of the exceptions provided in the Circular referred to above. 6. Since the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous and therefore is dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection

Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-5, Pune vs. Renu Electronics Private Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 353/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.353/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant V Renu Electronics Private Commissioner Of S Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income Tax, Circle-5, Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune. Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaacr8741G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.18/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant V Renu Electronics Private Commissioner Of S Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income Tax, Circle-5, Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune. Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaacr8741G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Are Two Appeals Ita No.353/Pun/2024 Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection C.O. No.18/Pun/2024 Filed By The

Section 10ASection 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 32(1)(iia)

Commissioner of s Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income Tax, Circle-5, Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune. Pune – 411045. PAN: AAACR8741G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.18/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant V Renu Electronics Private Commissioner of s Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income ... 03/10/2024 Date of pronouncement 28/10/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: These are two appeals ITA No.353/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection C.O. No.18/PUN/2024 filed by the ITA No.353/PUN/2024 & C.O. No.18/PUN/2024 Assessee; are directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] u/sec.250

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Nagpur vs. Manoj Kumar Vishandas Kamnani, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 89/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DemleFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 22/10/2024 Date of Order – 25/10/2024 O R D E R PER BENCH Appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the assessee are against the impugned order dated 27/01/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner Manoj Kumar Vishandas Kamnani ITA no.89/Nag./2023 ITA no.2/Nag./2023

DCIT, CC-2(2), Nagpur vs. Atul Ramsharan Gupta, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 274/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 17(3)

Revenue’s Appeal For Assessment year 2016–17 7. The issues arising out of the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in its Cross Objections are inter–connected with the issues raised in the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. Since we have dismissed the appeal 4 Atul ... Revenue is below the taxable limit of ` 60 lakh in view of the recent CBDT Circular no. no.09 of 2024, dated 17/09/2024, therefore, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed. However, needless to mention here that we have granted liberty

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore vs. Commander Industries Private Limited, Indore

ITA 24/IND/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 47

ITANo.24/Ind/2024 & CO No.12/Ind/2024 Commander Industries Private Ltd. ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM : This appeal by revenue and CO by

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. J S Nihar Banu, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 445/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. J S Nihar Banu, Palakkad

ITA 444/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Appu Traders, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 442/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Appu Traders, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 441/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Appu Traders, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 364/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. J S Nihar Banu, Palakkad

ITA 363/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. M Shahjahan, Palakkad

ITA 362/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. M Shahjahan, Palakkad

ITA 361/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. M Shahjahan, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 360/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Cir-2, Madurai vs. M Shahjahan, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 359/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Achu Traders, Palakkad

ITA 358/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Achu Traders, Palakkad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 357/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 3 -: 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Achu Traders, Palakkad

ITA 356/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai vs. Achu Traders, Palakkad

ITA 355/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, all dated 29.11.2018 relevant to the assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The assessees have also filed Cross Objections against the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience these appeals ... well as Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2.0 All the appeals filed by the Revenue are delayed by three/four days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal for which, the Revenue has filed petitions in support of an affidavit for condonation

Mother Theressa Educational Society, Amalapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 80G

घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals and cross objection are filed by the assessee and revenue, against different orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals / Exemption) for the A.Y.2018-19. Since all these ... filled by the revenue. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. C.O. No. 01/VIZ/2024 (2018-19) (assessee appeal) 11. This cross objection is filed by the assessee against the appeal of the revenue in ITA No. 163/VIZ/2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19. As we have dismissed