← 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

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Fis Global Business Solutions India Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5002/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra[Assessment Year: 2020-21] Dcit Vs. Fis Global Business Solutions New Delhi India Private Limited S-405, Lower Ground Floor, Greater Kailash, Part Ii New Delhi Pan No.Aaach2851H Appellant Respondent Co. No. 213/Del/2025 (In Ita No.5002/Del/2025) [Assessment Year: 2020-21] Fis Global Business Vs. Dcit Solutions India Private New Delhi Limited S-405, Lower Ground Floor, Greater Kailash, Part Ii New Delhi Pan No.Aaach2851H Appellant Respondent Revenue By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Assessee By Sh. Vishal Kalra, Advocate Ms. Reema Grewal, Ca Sh. Kashish Gupta, Advocate Date Of Hearing 18.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.01.2026

Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

Kashish Gupta, Advocate Date of Hearing 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2026 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal is filed by the Revenue and cross objection filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [herein after referred ... ESOP expenses as allowable expenditure u/s.37(1) of the Act by observing as under ;- 2. Since the issues are common and the appeals and cross objections are connected, hence the same are being heard together and disposed off by this common order. We take up the Revenue's appeal being

ITO, New Delhi vs. Ruptex Mineral Water Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed and cross-objection filed by Assessee are allowed

ITA 3073/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ruptex Mineral Water Private New Delhi. Limited, K No. 799/1 Village Burari Jagatpur B.O. Jagatpur New Delhi. Pin: 1100 84, Delhi Pan :Aabcr0261Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Mineral Water Private New Delhi. Limited, K No. 799/1 Village Burari Jagatpur B.O. Jagatpur New Delhi. PIN: 1100 84, Delhi PAN :AABCR0261Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross-Objection No.210/Del/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.3073/Del/2025) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ruptex Mineral Water Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, K No. 799/1 Village ... Date of pronouncement 14.01.2026 ITA No. 3073/Del.2025 & CO No.210/Del/2025 ORDER PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the Department of Revenue and Cross-Objections filed by the assessee are against order dated 10.03.2025 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal vs. Ashutosh Foods, Nissing

ITA 234/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadeputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ashutosh Foods Income Tax, Karnalkaithal Road, Aayakarbhawan, Nissingkarnal, Sector-12, Karnal Haryana – 132024 Haryana – 132001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aavfa2840F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dr.Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148

228/Del/2025 Ashutosh Foods (AY: 2015-16) O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2024 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority ... 228/Del/2025 Ashutosh Foods (AY: 2015-16) purchases which have been deleted by the ld. CIT(A) for which revenue is in appeal and cross objection have been filed by the assesse, where one of the grounds is that no jurisdictional notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued

Dy. CIT, Income Tax Deptt vs. Nivaya Resources Pvt. Ltd., Gujrat

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 953/DEL/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra[Assessment Year: 2017] Dy. Cit, Aayakar Bhawan Vs. Nivaya Resources Pvt. Ltd. Haryana 211, World Trade Centre, Karnal Shamalkha Sayajigunj, Vadodra, Vadodra Gujarat 390020 Pan No.Aaica32981E Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.75/Del/2025 (In Ita No.953/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2017] Nivaya Resources Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit, Aayakar Bhawan 211, World Trade Centre, Haryana Shamalkha Sayajigunj, Karnal Vadodra, Vadodra Gujarat 390020 Pan No.Aaica32981E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 14ASection 68

Aayakar Bhawan Vs. Nivaya Resources Pvt. Ltd. Haryana 211, World trade Centre, Karnal Shamalkha Sayajigunj, Vadodra, Vadodra Gujarat 390020 PAN No.AAICA32981E Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.75/Del/2025 (In ITA No.953/Del/2024) [Assessment Year: 2017] Nivaya Resources Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT, Aayakar Bhawan 211, World trade Centre, Haryana Shamalkha Sayajigunj, Karnal Vadodra ... Dhruv Goel, CA Date of Hearing 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2026 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal is filed by the revenue and cross objection by the assessee against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ NFAC, Delhi vide order dated

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Al-Arsh Exports Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 227/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year:2014-15] Acit, Central Circle, Al-Arsh Exports Pvt Ltd., Room No.229, 2Nd Floor, 30, Bazar Lane, Cgo Complex-1, Vs C.P. Bengali Market, Hapur Chungi Ghaziabad, New Delhi-110001 Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan Aalca5543N Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.14/Del/2024 [In Ita No.227/Del/2024] [Assessment Year:2014-15] Al-Arsh Exports Pvt Ltd., Acit, Central Circle, Room No.229, 2Nd Floor, 30, Bazar Lane, C.P. Bengali Market, Vs Cgo Complex-1, New Delhi-110001 Hapur Chungi Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan Aalca5543N Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Mukesh Kumar Jha, Cit(Dr) Assessee By Shri Swaran Singh, Ca & Shri Vipan Kundra, Ca Date Of Hearing 15.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.01.2026

Section 120(4)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 68

Floor, 30, Bazar Lane, CGO Complex-1, Vs C.P. Bengali Market, Hapur Chungi Ghaziabad, New Delhi-110001 Uttar Pradesh-201002 PAN AALCA5543N Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.14/DEL/2024 [IN ITA No.227/Del/2024] [Assessment Year:2014-15] AL-Arsh Exports Pvt Ltd., ACIT, Central Circle, Room No.229, 2nd Floor, 30, Bazar Lane ... passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee has also filed cross objection. The appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee, for the purposes of convenience were heard together and are being disposed

The DCIT, 1(1), Indore vs. M/S. Ritspin Synthetics Ltd., Pithampur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms indicated above, and the cross-objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 213/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Agarwal, C.A. and Shri Pankaj Mogra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 68

Date of Pronouncement 13.01.2026 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JM: The present appeal has been filed by the Department and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order ... accommodation entries in the guise of unsecured loan from Kolkata based company.” 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in the cross objection: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deciding

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S Linde Engineering Pvt Ltd, Vadodara

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

ITA 1983/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 92C(4)

Hearing 12.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 13.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal by the Revenue and the Cross Objection by the assessee arise out of the order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-13, [hereinafter referred ... assessee is enhanced as a result of computation of arm's length price.” 3. The assessee has raised following grounds in its Cross-Objection:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO erred in making an assessment, under section 143(3) r.w.s

DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Suresh Kumar Banthia, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1894/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri SM Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Raha, DR Date of hearing: 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement: 13.01.2026 ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 (hereinafter referred ... technical ground without deciding the issue on merit. Besides, the assessee has raised the issue in the cross objection in ground nos.7 to 9 in the cross objection, which is qua the addition of 236.65 crores u/s 69A of the Act and 21,64,92,500/- towards interest

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Vedanta Resources Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and

ITA 1845/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148

appeal for hearing. The assessee has pressed two legal issues at the time of hearing ( Ground No. 2 and 4 as raised in the cross objection which is extracted below:- "2. For that the learned. CIT(A) incorrectly concluded that AO had looked into the information and that condition ... hence, we quash the re-opening as well as the consequent assessment framed. The ground no. 2 of Cross Objection by the assessee is allowed. By virtue of ground no. 4 above , the assessee has challenged the assessment framed u/s 147 of the Act dated 31.03.2022 as barred by limitation

ITO 19.3.1, Mumbai vs. Raashi Sawhney, Mumbai

ITA 7091/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 69

Revenue against the respective order(s) of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’] and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee against the respective order(s) of the Ld.CIT(A), 2 Raashi Sawhney pertaining to Assessment Years ... outset, the Ld. CIT-DR submitted that all these matters involve common issue and, therefore, can be taken up together. All these appeals and Cross Objections were thus heard together and are being disposed-off by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 3. With the consent of both

ITO 19.3.1, Mumbai vs. Raashi Sawhney, Mumbai

ITA 7090/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 69

Revenue against the respective order(s) of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’] and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee against the respective order(s) of the Ld.CIT(A), 2 Raashi Sawhney pertaining to Assessment Years ... outset, the Ld. CIT-DR submitted that all these matters involve common issue and, therefore, can be taken up together. All these appeals and Cross Objections were thus heard together and are being disposed-off by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 3. With the consent of both

ITO, Mumbai vs. Raashi Sawhney, Mumbai

ITA 7089/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 69

Revenue against the respective order(s) of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’] and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee against the respective order(s) of the Ld.CIT(A), 2 Raashi Sawhney pertaining to Assessment Years ... outset, the Ld. CIT-DR submitted that all these matters involve common issue and, therefore, can be taken up together. All these appeals and Cross Objections were thus heard together and are being disposed-off by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 3. With the consent of both

ITO(TDS)-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sashwat Energy Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the CO is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4279/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarincome Tax Officer (Tds) – V/S. Sashwat Energy Private 2(2)(1) बनाम Limited, 3Rd Floor, Mtnl Building, 10Th Floor, Universal Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – Majestic Lokhande Marg, 400 026, Maharashtra Chembur West, Mumbai – 400 043, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Mums95080G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी प्रत्याक्षेपसं./C.O. No.273/Mum/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 4279/Mum/2025) (A.Y. 2021-22) Sashwat Energy Private V/S. Income Tax Officer (Tds) – Limited, बनाम 2(2)(1), 3Rd Floor, Mtnl 10Th Floor, Universal Majestic Building, Cumballa Hill, Lokhande Marg, Chembur Mumbai – 400 026, West, Mumbai – 400 043, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Mums95080G Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms Kinjal Bhuta,ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, (Sr. DR)
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194JSection 200Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40Section 40a

without appreciating that TDS was not required to be deducted and therefore no TDS return was also required to be filed. 10. The cross objection of the assessee is consequential in nature in view of our decision concurring with the ld.CIT(A) that the assessee

Acid, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. Emami Realty Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1457/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 2Section 250Section 50CSection 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(x)

Date of pronouncing the order :January 12, 2026 ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The appeal filed by the revenue and a cross-objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 26.02.2024 of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) passed

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection of the assessee is partly

ITA 2831/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

12/01/2026 Shapoorji Pallaonji And Company Pvt.Ltd. 2 ITA No. 2831/MUM/2025 & CO 130/M/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the assessee are directed against order dated 20.02.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 50, Mumbai [in short ... assessment year 2014-15. As the appeal of the Revenue and cross-objection of the assessee are arising from the same impugned order, both were heard together and disposed off by way of this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Honey Arora, Delhi

ITA 998/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153ASection 153D

parties on merits are hereby rendered academic. 3. These Revenue’s five appeals ITA Nos.889, 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 are dismissed and assessee’s cross objections C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Honey Arora, Delhi

ITA 889/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153ASection 153D

parties on merits are hereby rendered academic. 3. These Revenue’s five appeals ITA Nos.889, 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 are dismissed and assessee’s cross objections C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced

Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle 5(3)(1), G B Nagar

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the impugned

ITA 2760/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaravindra Kumar Gupta Vs. Dcit, Circle 5(3)(1) C/O Ca Vaibhav Goel Gb Nagar 75 Navyug Market Aaykar Bhavan, A-2D, 1St Floor, Ghaziabad Sector – 24 Uttar Pradesh – 201002 Noida, Up- 201307 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahmpg9176E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vaibhav Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr
Section 132Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

considered view notice u/s 148 is bad in law and thus, the entire reassessment proceedings is held as invalid and is hereby quashed. The cross objections of the assessee taken in ground of appeal no.1 to 5 of the assessee C.O. are allowed.” 7. In the light of the aforesaid

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Honey Arora, Delhi

ITA 1015/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153ASection 153D

parties on merits are hereby rendered academic. 3. These Revenue’s five appeals ITA Nos.889, 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 are dismissed and assessee’s cross objections C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Honey Arora, Delhi

ITA 1014/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153ASection 153D

parties on merits are hereby rendered academic. 3. These Revenue’s five appeals ITA Nos.889, 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 are dismissed and assessee’s cross objections C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced