“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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, Mumbai vs. Parth Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the department is accordingly dismissed having become infructuous and the cross objection filed by the assessee are also dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 536/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhandcit – 17(1) Vs. Parth Constructions Room No. 117, 1St Floor, G-Block, 24, Sholapur Street, Dana Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Bundar, Mumbai – 400009. Complex, Mumbai – 400051. Pan: Aakfp1122A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 68

basis of documentary evidences and that there is need to take into account the surrounding circumstances?” 3. The assessee has taken grounds of cross objection in C.O. No. 104/Mum/2024 as under: 1. “On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating ... same may be disposed off accordingly. 5. We have also heard the Ld. AR on behalf of the assessee with respect to the cross objection, who has supported the submissions of the Ld. DR, and stated that since the appeal is not maintainable and has become infructuous and as such

ACIT-CC-1(3), Mumbai vs. Bhagwati Developers, Navi Mumbai

ITA 1490/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 69C

bunch of three appeals filed by The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax central Circle -1 (3), Mumbai [The learned AO] and 2 cross objections filed by the assessee in case of 2 entities namely M/s Bhagwati developers and Shanti enterprises [ Assessee] for two assessment years i.e. assessment year ... without going into the merits of the case discussed in the assessment order. 4. Assessee is aggrieved and has filed cross objection in CO number 80/M/2024 raising the following grounds of cross objections: i. on the facts and circumstances of the cross objector's case and in law, the learned

ACIT-CC-1(3), New Marine Lines, Churchgate vs. Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Vashi

In the result ground number 1 and 2 of the appeal for assessment year 2015 – 16 of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 1349/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2012-13 A.Y.2015-16 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Bhagwati Developers, Mumbai 1306, 13Th Floor, Vs. Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Co No. 80/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1346/Mum/2024] Bhagwati Developers, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), 1306, 13Th Floor, Mumbai Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Pan Aalfb 5272C A.Y. 2012-13 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Mumbai Office No. 1306, Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi Co No. 110/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1349/Mum/2024] Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Office No. 1306, Real Tech Mumbai Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek Jain

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 69C

bunch of three appeals filed by The Assistant Commissioner of Income tax , central Circle -1 (3) , Mumbai [The learned AO] and 2 cross objections filed by the assessee in case of 2 entities namely M/s Bhagwati developers and Shanti enterprises [ Assessee] for two assessment years i.e. assessment year ... without going into the merits of the case discussed in the assessment order. 4. Assessee is aggrieved and has filed cross objection in CO number 80/M/2024 raising the following grounds of cross objections: – i. on the facts and circumstances of the cross objector's case and in law, the learned

ACIT-CC-1(3), Mumbai vs. Bhagwati Developers, Navi Mumbai

In the result ground number 1 and 2 of the appeal for assessment year 2015 – 16 of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 1346/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 69C

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -03, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Ramavtar Agarwal, Delhi

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

ITA 3079/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit Vs. Ramavtar Agarwal Central Circle – 03 S-92, Second Floor, New Delhi Panchsheel Park, Delhi Pan: Abfpa 8385 E (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 17/Del/2024 (In Ita No. 3079/Del/2023) (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ramavtar Agarwal Vs. Dcit S-92, Second Floor, Central Circle – 03 Panchsheel Park, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Abfpa 8385 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anu Krishna Agarwal, CIT - D.R

Section 153A

dismissed as withdrawn/not pressed. 4. In the final result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. 5. In view of the above, the Cross objection preferred by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. ITA No. 3079/Del/2023 and CO No.17/Del/2024 Ramavtar Agarwal 6. In the result, the appeal of the revenue ... dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed. Order was pronounced in the open court on 08/10/2024. - (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 08/10/2024 Priti Yadav

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Circle Aurangabad, Near Cantonment Area Aurangabad vs. Alhira Education and Welfare Society, Aurangabad, Near Kat-Kat Gate

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee in C

ITA 494/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora

Section 10Section 11Section 11(7)Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

dated 09.01.2024 passed by LD Addl./JCIT(A)-5, Chennai for the 2 C.O. No.27/PUN/2024 assessment year 2019-20. The assessee is also in cross objection bearing Cross Objection No.27/PUN/2024. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an educational society receiving more than ... PARTLY ALLOWED.” 4. It is this order against which the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal and the assessee has also filed cross objection bearing C.O. No.27/PUN/2024. C.O. No.27/PUN/2024 – By Assessee : 5. First, we shall take up the cross objection of the assessee, wherein, the assessee has raised

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-8(2), Mumbai vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue bearing ITA Nos 2460,2462, 2657,

ITA 2677/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal / Shri AtulFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) / Ms

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Rajeshwari Menon (SR DR) Date of hearing : 03/10/2024 Date of pronouncement : 07/10/2024 PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeals of the revenue and the cross objections file by the assessee related to assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, 2013-14, 2015-16 an 2016-17 challenging the orders of the Learned ... incidental to the main objects of running a hospital and Research centre.” C.O. No.164/Mum/2024 – C.O. by Assessee – A.Y. 2006-07 Grounds of Cross Objection “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of Act and rejecting the submission of the Appellant

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle -8(2), Mumbai vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed,

ITA 2676/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

/Mum/2024 CO Nos 163 & 164/Mum/2024 Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre ORDER PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeals of the revenue and the cross objections file by the assessee related to assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, 2013-14, 2015-16 an 2016-17 challenging the orders of the Learned Commissioner ... incidental to the main objects of running a hospital and Research centre.” C.O. No.164/Mum/2024 — C.O. by Assessee — A.Y. 2006-07 Grounds of Cross Objection “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of Act and rejecting the submission of the Appellant

DCIT-CC-8(2), Mumbai vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue bearing ITA Nos 2460,2462, 2657,

ITA 2657/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal / Shri AtulFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) / Ms

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

DCIT-CC-8(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg

ITA 2462/MUM/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal / Shri Atul Suraiya / Ms. Bhavika JainFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) / Ms. Rajeshwari Menon (SR DR)

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

/Mum/2024 CO Nos 163 & 164/Mum/2024 Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre ORDER PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeals of the revenue and the cross objections file by the assessee related to assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, 2013-14, 2015-16 an 2016-17 challenging the orders of the Learned Commissioner ... incidental to the main objects of running a hospital and Research centre.” C.O. No.164/Mum/2024 – C.O. by Assessee – A.Y. 2006-07 Grounds of Cross Objection “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of Act and rejecting the submission of the Appellant

DCIT-CC-8(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed,

ITA 2460/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Hifzur Rehman Ansari, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(1)(5), Mumbai

ITA 164/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal / Shri Atul Suraiya / Ms. Bhavika JainFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR) / Ms. Rajeshwari Menon (SR DR)

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

/Mum/2024 CO Nos 163 & 164/Mum/2024 Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre ORDER PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeals of the revenue and the cross objections file by the assessee related to assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, 2013-14, 2015-16 an 2016-17 challenging the orders of the Learned Commissioner ... incidental to the main objects of running a hospital and Research centre.” C.O. No.164/Mum/2024 – C.O. by Assessee – A.Y. 2006-07 Grounds of Cross Objection “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of Act and rejecting the submission of the Appellant

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Concord Biotech Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1090/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 268A

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2020-21, whereas the assessee filed Cross Objections against the above Department appeals. 2. At the outset, it is informed by the Counsel for the assessee that the Tax Effect in both these ... relating to Low Tax Effect of the above appeals. Since the Revenue appeals are dismissed following CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 dated 17/09/2024, the Cross Objection raised by the Assessee is hereby allowed. 7. In the result, Cross Objections filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed. Order pronounced in the open

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Concord Biotech Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1089/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 268A

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Jaipur

ITA 469/JPR/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024

For Appellant: Shri Tanju Agarwal AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 69

470/JP/2024 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR VS SHRI MAHAVEER KUMAR JAIN Id. CIT(A) ] dated 29-01-2024. Even assessee also preferred Cross objections to the appeal so filed by the revenue against the same order of the Id. CIT(A). The grounds of appeal filed by the respective parties ... justification or evidence has been furnished by the assessee, therefore, no further comments on paper book are required to be submitted. 6. Further, the cross objection filed by the assessee that the assessment order was passed without mandatory DIN has no significance as the assessment was communicated vide

Rising Stock Trade Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1), Jaipur

ITA 303/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

ACIT Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jmp Securities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objection by the assessee is allowed, while the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3722/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri. K Gopal/ Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Meena Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 154Section 250Section 68

Securities Pvt Ltd O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeal by the Revenue and cross objection by the assessee have been filed challenging the impugned order dated 14/05/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner ... considering that the amounts dealt with in the CIT(A) order do not pertain to the assessment order appealed against?”” 3. While in its cross objection, the assessee has raised the following grounds: – “1) The National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as 'NFAC') erred in upholding the validity

ACIT, Range-1, Lucknow vs. Shri Shiv Shanker Singh, Lucknow

The appeal of the Department stands dismissed

ITA 432/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Asstt. Commissioner Of V. Shiv Shanker Singh Income Tax 203/ 236, Baroulia Daliganj Range – 1 Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aotps1323K (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.04/Lkw/2021 [ Arising Out Of Ita No.432/Lkw/2020] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shiv Shanker Singh V. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 203/ 236, Baroulia Daliganj Tax Lucknow Range – 1 Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aotps1323K (Cross-Objector) (Respondent) Department By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Assessee By: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 06 08 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

order of the ld. CIT(A). Since we have already dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on ground of low tax effect, the Cross Objection of the assessee, supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A), has become infructuous and hence the same is dismissed as infructuous

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-V, Lucknow vs. Patel PAN Products Ltd., Lucknow

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

ITA 736/LKW/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Gd Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Range-V M/S. Patel Pan Products V. Aayakar Bhawan, Ashok Marg, Ltd. Lucknow-226001. 37-38, Gaurabagh, Kursi Road, Lucknow-226002. Pan: Adypa2513M (Appellant) (Respondent) C. O. No. 09/Lkw/2019 (In Arising Out Of Ita. No. 736/Lkw/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Patel Pan Products Ltd. V. Acit, Range-V 37-38, Gaurabagh, Kursi Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Ashok Lucknow-226002. Marg, Lucknow-226001. Pan:Aaecp0472C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kappor, Ca Respondent By: Shri Manu Chaurasia, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kappor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasia, CIT(DR)

Section 132ASection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 275(2)Section 43BSection 68

pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: This is an appeal preferred by the revenue and the cross- objection (CO) preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)- 3, Lucknow dated 20.10.2016 relating to the AY 2009-10. The grounds ... appeal filed by the revenue is allowed. C.O. No. 09/LKW/2019 (for AY. 2009-10) 16. There is delay of 464 days in filing of cross objection by the assessee and the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay. The Ld. DR has no objection to the prayer made

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sylns Agro Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the Revenue

ITA 405/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.S.No Appeal In Ita No. Assessee Respondent A.Y 1 381/Hyd/2023 Acit Central Circle Bhoomika Agro 2020-21 2(2) Hyderabad Farms (P) Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 2 382/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 3 Co 7/Hyd/2023 Bhoomika Agro Acit Central Circle 2020-21 (Ita 381/H/23) Farms (P) Ltd 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcb6665G 4 Co 8/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 382/H/23) 5 385/Hyd/2023 -Do- Sunshine Estate 2019-20 Construction India Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 6 386/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 7 387/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2022-22 8 Co3/Hyd/2023 Sunshine Estate Acit Central Circle 2019-20 (Ita 385/H/23) Construction India 2(2) Hyderabad Llp, Hyderabad Pan:Adrfs0667D 9 Co4/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 (Ita 386/H/23) 10 Co5/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 (Ita 387/H/23) 11 388/Hyd/2023 -Do- Krishi Housing (P) 2017-18 Ltd Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B 12 389/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2018-19 13 390/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2019-20 14 391/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2020-21 15 392/Hyd/2023 -Do- -Do- 2021-22 16 Co9/Hyd/2023 Krishi Housing (P) Acit Central Circle 2017-18 (Ita 388/H/23) Ltd Hyderabad 2(2) Hyderabad Pan:Aafck9740B

Page 2 of 37 ITA 381 of 2023 and others Bhoomika Agro Farms आदेश/ORDER Per Bench: These Appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross objections filed by different assessee’s are directed against separate, but identical orders of the learned CIT (A) – 12 Hyderabad, all dated 31/05/2023 and pertain ... respectively. Since facts are identical and the issue is common, for the sake of convenience, these appeals and cross objections are being heard and disposed off, by this common consolidated order. ITA Nos 381 & 382/Hyd/2023 & C. Os 7 & 8/Hyd/2023 2. The Revenue has, more or less raised common grounds