← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Bunge India Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4781/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

Date of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee against separate impugned order of even date 30/03/2017 passed by CIT(A)-55, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143 ... whether adjustment should be applied on international transaction only or at entity level even if TNMM is treated as Most Appropriate Method. In cross objection the assessee has stated that benefit of proviso to Section 92C(2) (+/-) 5% shall be given when that is taken into consideration then, no adjustment

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Bunge India Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4780/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

Date of Pronouncement 08/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee against separate impugned order of even date 30/03/2017 passed by CIT(A)-55, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143 ... whether adjustment should be applied on international transaction only or at entity level even if TNMM is treated as Most Appropriate Method. In cross objection the assessee has stated that benefit of proviso to Section 92C(2) (+/-) 5% shall be given when that is taken into consideration then, no adjustment

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune vs. Sandvik Coromant India Pvt Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1072/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1072/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Dy.Commissioner Of Sandvik Coromant India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle-8, Vs Ltd., Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Cross Objection No.7/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sandvik Coromant India The Dy.Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs6638K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Patakh – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Ita 1072/Pn/2023 Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Co No.7/Pun/2024 Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] U/S.250 Of The Act, For A.Y.2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 43B

Sandvik Coromant India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle-8, Vs Ltd., Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411012. PAN: AACCS6638K Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Cross Objection No.7/PUN/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sandvik Coromant India The Dy.Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune. Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi ... hearing 15/04/2024 Date of pronouncement 07/05/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal ITA 1072/PN/2023 filed by the Revenue and cross objection CO No.7/PUN/2024 filed by the Assessee are directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] u/s.250 of the Act, for A.Y.2018-19

ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 645/KOL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata………..…….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…..........…..........................…..…..... Respondent 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] C.O. 4/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd…………….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector 6, Lyons Range, Kolkata – 1. [Pan: Aaccd9344F] Vs Ito, Ward-6(1), Kolkata …………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 263

आदेश / ORDER संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal by the revenue and the corresponding cross objections by the assessee have been preferred against the order dated 08.09.2020 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata [hereinafter referred ... said order of the Ld. CIT(A), the revenue has come with the present appeal before us, whereas, the assessee has filed the corresponding cross objections. I.T.A. No.645/Kol/2020 & C.O. 4/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Daniel Commodities Pvt. Ltd 4. The revenue in its appeal is aggrieved by the action

ITO, Ward-5, Patiala vs. Sh. Kawaljeet Singh, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 448/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

ITO, Ward-5, Patiala vs. Sh. Kawaljeet Singh, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 447/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

ITO, Ward-5, Patiala vs. Sh. Kawaljeet Singh, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 446/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Patiala vs. Sh. Mohar Singh, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 445/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Income Tax Officer, Patiala vs. Kulwaran Singh, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 438/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Income Tax Officer, Patiala vs. Gurmeet Singh Pandher, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 437/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Gurpalsingh Chanansingh Nagra, Akola vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)

No.649/PUN/2013 & ITA No.1726/PUN/2014 & CO Nos.34 & 35/PUN/2019 wherein the Tribunal has condoned the delay of 1965/1018 days by observing as follows:– "2. The Cross objection for the A.Y. 2008-09 is late by 1965 days. Similar cross objection filed by the assessee for the A.Y. 2009-10 is also late ... submitted that the assessee was not properly advised by its then counsel for espousing the legal issue now sought to be raised in the Cross objections, Gurpalsingh Chanansingh Nagra ITA no.206/Mum./2023 which is fundamental in nature. The ld. DR strongly opposed the condonation of delay. 3. It is seen

Sanjay Shankarrao Jadhao, Amravati vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Amravati Circle, Amravati

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 250

Shri Sanjay Shankarrao Jadhao ITA no.198/Mum./2023 & 35/PUN/2019 wherein the Tribunal has condoned the delay of 1965/1018 days by observing as follows: "2. The Cross objection for the A.Y. 2008-09 is late by 1965 days. Similar cross objection filed by the assessee for the A.Y. 2009-10 is also ... submitted that the assessee was not properly advised by its then counsel for espousing the legal issue now sought to be raised in the Cross objections, which is fundamental in nature. The ld. DR strongly opposed the condonation of delay. 3. It is seen that through the Cross objections

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kumar Properties Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue as well as Cross

ITA 3248/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassistant Commissioner Of Vs. Kumar Properties Private Income Tax – 1(2)(1) Limited, 21, Woudboy Room No. 535, 5 Th Floor, Road, Hazarimal Somani Aayakar Bhawan, New Marg, Opp. Mumbai Marine Line, M.K. Road, Gymkhana, Fort – Mumbai- 400020 400001 Maharashtra – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aabck8464E Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No.13/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Rajan Vora a/wFor Respondent: P.D. Chougule
Section 143(2)Section 145(1)

directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1(2)(1) Mumbai dated 17.12.2018. Since the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assesse are based on identical facts on similar issue, therefore, for the sake of convenience both these appeals are adjudicated together ... revenue. Accordingly, ground no. 1 & 2 of the appeal of the revenue are dismissed. C.O. No 13/Mum/2024 9. The assessee has filed the Cross Objection in support of the order of ld. CIT(A) since we have dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue, therefore the Cross Objection filed become

Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(5), Income Tax Department, Delhi vs. Rahul Pokhriyal, Dwarka, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and C

ITA 3116/DEL/2023[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024

Bench: | during | and post demonetization period of the year.

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 31/08/2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18. Whereas the Assessee has filed Cross Objection. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under: “ Ld. 1 Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the Assessee by directing ... from 68 to 69D of the Act irrespective of whether the undisclosed assets found/taxed are prior to or after the demonetization period.” Grounds of Cross Objection filed by the assessee. “1. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in sustaining the entire addition

The Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, (Exemption), Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Keshava Reddy Educational Society`, Hyderabad

ITA 96/VIZ/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Vijayawada vs. Sri Keshava Reddy Educational Society, Hyderabad

ITA 95/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Vijayawada vs. Sri Venkateswara Educational Society, Hyderabad

ITA 94/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Vijayawada vs. Sri Sury Educational Society, Hyderabad

ITA 93/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Vijayawada vs. Sri Satyanarayana Swamy Educational Society, Hyderabad

ITA 92/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Vijayawada vs. Sri Kesava Reddy Educational Trust, Hyderabad

ITA 90/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.87 & 288/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

passed U/s. 144 and 144(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for various AYs. As well, the assesses have also raised Cross Objections. Since the issues raised by the Revenue in their respective appeals for different AYs are identical in nature, all the captioned appeals ... Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assesses are clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Firstly, we shall take up ITA No. 87/Viz/2018 (AY 2013-14) as a lead appeal. 9 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue