“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, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao, Chennai

Accordingly, cross- objections for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 stands dismissed

ITA 223/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.223/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpr-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.10/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.223/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.11/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.224/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.225/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम/ Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Central Circle-1(4)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR

Section 144

First Street, 6th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAFPR-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.10/Chny/2023 (In ITA No.223/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.11/Chny/2023 (In ITA No.224/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year ... Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2023 (In ITA No.225/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम/ DCIT Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Central Circle-1(4) 6th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Vs. Chennai. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.AAFPR-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent

DCIT, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri Vivek Papisetty, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 212/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.212/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri Vivek Papisetty बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.9/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.212/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Vivek Papisetty Dcit No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Vs. Central Circle-1(4) 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar (Cit)- Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Y. Sridhar (Fca)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

First Street, 6th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BRCPP-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.9/Chny/2023 (In ITA No.212/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Shri Vivek Papisetty DCIT No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Vs. Central Circle ... r.w.s. 153C of the Act on 03- 02-2020. 1.2 The Registry has noted delay of 3 days in assessee’s cross- objection, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR. Though Ld. CIT-DR has opposed condonation of delay, however, considering the period of delay, we condone

DCIT, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri Vivek Papisetty, Chennai

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 211/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.211/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit Shri Vivek Papisetty बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.8/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.211/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) बनाम/ Shri Vivek Papisetty Dcit No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Vs. Central Circle-1(4) 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Brcpp-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Cross Objector) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar (Cit)- Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Y. Sridhar (Fca)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)

First Street, 6th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BRCPP-6180-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.8/Chny/2023 (In ITA No.211/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) बनाम/ Shri Vivek Papisetty DCIT No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Vs. Central Circle ... r.w.s. 153A r.w.s. 153C of the Act on 03-02-2020. 1.2 The Registry has noted delay of 3 days in assessee’s cross- objection, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR. Though Ld. CIT-DR has opposed condonation of delay, however, considering the period of delay

ITO, International Taxation Ward1(2), Chennai vs. Rajamanickam Arulselvan, Chennai

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

ITA 479/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.479/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & C.O. No. 44/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 479/Chny/2023] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Rajamanickam Arulselvan, 65, Defence Officer Colony, 2Nd International Taxation Ward 1(2), Bsnl Building Tower-1, 4Th Floor, Avenue, 6Th Cross Street, Guindy, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai 600 006. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aappa2346C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha, G.: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, Dated 22.02.2023 Passed In Ita No. 10039/Cit(A)-16/2012-2013 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On The Facts, The Merits Of The Case & Provisions Of Law As Well & Hence Unsustainable. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Failing To Appreciate That When The Assessee Had Applied For Conversion Of The Vacant Land Into A Plotted

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 45(3)

towards long term capital gain. 6. Aggrieved by ld. CIT(A)’s order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. The assessee also filed Cross Objections. 7. The ld. DR, Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) erred in failing to appreciate that when ... with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. C.O. No. 44/Chny/2023 13. The assessee has filed cross objection by taking various grounds of reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act. 14. We have heard both the parties and considered relevant

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jainam Technologies Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2835/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआ.अ.सं.2835/मुं/2023(िन.व.2014-15) Dcit,Circle 14(1)(1), Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Jainam Technologies P Ltd. 111/112 B, Haveshwar Complex, Station Road, Vidyavihar, Mumbai – 400 086. Pan:Aabcj-3047-Q. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent C.O. No.9/Mum/2024 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2835/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2014-15) ] M/S. Jainam Technologies P Ltd. 111/112 B, Haveshwar Complex, Station Road, Vidyavihar, Mumbai – 400 086. Pan:Aabcj-3047-Q. .... Cross Objector Vs. Dcit,Circle 14(1)(1), Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ... Appellant In Appeal Assessee By : Shri Shashank Mehta Revenue By : Smt. Jayshree Menon सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/03/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. Jayshree Menon

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 13/06/2023, for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee has filed Cross Objections to support order of the CIT(A). 2. Smt. Jayshree Menon representing the Department submitted that CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made ... Authority. We find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal of Revenue is without any merit, hence, dismissed. 5. The assessee has filed Cross Objections to support the order of CIT(A). Since, we have dismissed appeal of the Revenue, the Cross Objections become infructuous, hence, dismissed as such

DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji Centre 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Mumbai

ITA 2233/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Co No. 55/Mum/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2233/Mum/2021) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Private Dy. Cit, Circle-3(3)(1) Limited Mumbai 1St Floor, 41/44, S P Centre, Minoo Vs. Desai Marg, Colaba, Mumbai-400 005

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora & Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri H M Bhatt

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: The Revenue and the assessee are in cross appeal and the assessee has also filed cross objection challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment ... assessee on various grounds. Both the Revenue as well as the assessee are in appeal and the assessee has also filed the cross objection challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A). 4. Ground No. 1 of the Revenue’s appeal is on the disallowance made

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) (1), Mumbai

ITA 2025/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora & Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri H M Bhatt

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai vs. M/S Bsr Builders Engineers & Contractors, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 734/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:732, 733 & 734/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & C.O Nos.34, 35 & 36/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. Nos.732, 733 & 734/Chny/2023] The Dcit, M/S. Bsr Builders Central Circle 2(3), Vs. Engineers & Contractors, Chennai. No.28, Tank Bund Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aagfb 7140N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent / Cross Objector) राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocates सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri P.M. KathirFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(2)

तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: These three appeals by the Revenue and three cross objections by the assessee are arising out of the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai in ITA Nos. 971, 972 & 973/22-23 ... years i.e., & C.O Nos.34 to 36/CHNY/2023 assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Therefore, these appeals of Revenue are dismissed. 9. Coming to cross objections of the assessee, we noted that mainly the grounds raised are supportive to the order of CIT(A) except the ground that the addition

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai vs. M/S Bsr Builders Engineers & Contractors, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 733/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri P.M. KathirFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(2)

DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai vs. M/S Bsr Builders Engineers & Contractors, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 732/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri P.M. KathirFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(2)

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S Aditya Trading Solutions Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 843/CHNY/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 843/Chny/2022 & Co No.: 17/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aditya Trading Solutions Income Tax, V. Private Limited, Central Circle-3(1), 25 G9, Gems Court, Chennai – 34. Khader Nawaz Khan Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aafca-0343-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit : Shri. I. Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 68

तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA. G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are directed against common order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, dated 22.06.2022 and pertains ... identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience, the appeal filed by the revenue :-2-: ITA. No:843/Chny/2022 & CO No: 17/Chny/2023 and cross objection filed by the assessee are being heard together and disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Everest Securities and Finance Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed , whereas

ITA 2818/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Cit Circle 3(3)(1), Everest Securities & Finance Room No. 609, Aayakar Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Tower 3, Wing B, Kohinoor City Churchgate, Mall Kohinoor City, Kirol Road, Mumbai-400020. Kurla West, Mumbai-400070. Pan No. Aacce 3678 B Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Siddhesh Chougule

Section 115JSection 14A

8/M/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Revenue and cross This appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the objection by the assessee are directed against order dated 25.05.2023 passed by the assessee are directed against order dated 25.05.2023 passed ... into merits of the issue? 2.1 The grounds raised by the a The grounds raised by the assessee in the cross ssessee in the cross-objection are reproduced as under: reproduced as under: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chamber vs. Farida Zulfikar Lokhandwala, Mumbai

ITA 2512/MUM/2023[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआ.अ.सं.2512/मुं/2023(नि.व.2020-21)

For Appellant: S/Shri K.Gopal & Om Kandalkar, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr.AR

Section 50C(2)

Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short 'the CIT(A)'] dated 19/05/2023, for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The assessee has filed Cross Objections in appeal by the Revenue. 2. The Revenue has assailed the order of CIT(A) on three counts: (i) Deleting of addition made on account ... pleaded that he has offered to tax the rent accrued during the relelvant period. The same plea has been reiterated by the assessee in Cross Objections (ground No.1). The assessee has been taking contrary stand before the different authorities. The Id. Departmental Representative prayed for reversing the findings

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, (OSD) Range-1, Hyderabad vs. Agarwal Industries Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1062/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1061 & 1062/Hyd/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Jt. Cit (Osd) Vs. Agarwal Industries (P) Range-1 Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aacca0094R (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Smt. K. Haritha, Cit(Dr) & Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Enterprises 139taxmann.com 208. 11.1 While the proposition raised by the learned AR for the assessee may be correct. But in the absence of any cross objection Page 5 of 10 ITA 1061 and 1062 Agarwal Industries P Ltd raised / appeal by the assessee against the order passed by the learned

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, (OSD) Range-1, Hyderabad vs. Agarwal Industries Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1061/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

The ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Piyushbhai Bhailalbhai Hirpara, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and that of the assessee’s CO are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 553/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roywith Cross Objection No.16/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Ito, Ward-7(2)(1) Vs. Shri Piyushbhai Bhailalbhai Hirpara Ahmedabad. A/24, 1055/1064, Badrinarayan Society Nr.Sub-Station B/H. Thakkarbapa Nagar Ahmedabad 382 350, Gujarat. Pan : Aclph 3966 M 0 अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" य थ"/(Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" य थ" थ" Assessee By : Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69A

अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, JUDICIAL MEMBER With Cross Objection No.16/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 ITO, Ward-7(2)(1) Vs. Shri Piyushbhai Bhailalbhai Hirpara Ahmedabad. A/24, 1055/1064, Badrinarayan Society Nr.Sub-Station B/h. Thakkarbapa ... आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue and cross objection by the Assessee against order passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Laxmi Komatireddy, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 131(1)Section 132Section 153A

Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, in the case of Smt. Laxmi Komatireddy (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2015-16, Revenue preferred this appeal. Assessee filed Cross-Objections against the same. 2. Facts, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual, derives income from salary, house property, Long Term Capital Gain ... Revenue. 19. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. C.O.No. 25/Hyd/2022: 20. After hearing both the sides, we find that the cross objection filed by the assessee is in support of the order of the learned CIT(A). As we have Page 21 of 23 C.O.No. 25/Hyd/2022 already

M/S Prudential Management Advisors Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 719/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 719/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Prudential Management Assistant Commissioner Of Advisors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Kolkata Suite No. 10, 5Th Floor Shantiniketan Building 8, Camac Street Kolkata - 700017 [Pan : Aaecp2505Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manoj Kataruka, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 24/05/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Action Of The Cit(A) To Confirm The Addition Made By The Ao Of Rs.6,34,50,000/- On Account Of Loss On Sale Of Investments Is Contrary To The Material Evidences Of Record & The Addition Is Arbitrary, Excessive & Illegal. 2) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Action Of The Cit(A) Confirm The Addition Made By The Ao Of Rs.25,33,00,386/- On Account Of Sundry Creditors U/S 41(1) Of The Act Is Contrary To The Material Evidences Of Record & The Addition Is Arbitrary, Excessive & Illegal.

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 41(1)

grounds is neither wilful nor intentional. In view of the above, the aforesaid additional grounds may kindly be admitted and adjudicated while hearing the cross objection filed by the assessee. An opportunity of being heard is prayed for.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Asaikani Nadar Kamaraj, Rajapalayam

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

ITA 1197/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1197/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & C.O. No. 54/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 1197/Chny/2023] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Asaikani Nadar Kamaraj, Income Tax, 7/84, Pound Street, Chokkanathaputhur, Central Circle 2, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District, Madurai. Tamil Nadu 626 121. [Pan:Aaxpk1318E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri R. Venkataraman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 31.08.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 On 01.11.2017 Admitting A Total

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkataraman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145Section 68

/Date of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection by the assessee are directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, dated 31.08.2023 relevant to the assessment ... unexplained sundry creditors under section 68 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 15. Coming to the Cross Objections of the assessee, the CO was filed with a delay of 2 days in filing the CO before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle5(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Larsen & Toubro Limited ( Formerly Known As L & T Shipbuilding Limited ), Mumbai

ITA 2350/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Larsen & Toubro Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Central Circle-5(4), As L & T Shipbuilding Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Limited), Vs. Air India Building, L&T House, Nariman Point, N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400021 Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl0140P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, D.R

Section 48(1)Section 50B

Revenue as well as the assessee M/s. Larsen & Toubro Shipbuilding Ltd. have come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeal and cross objection respectively. 4. We have heard the Ld. Authorised Representatives of the parties to the appeal, perused the orders passed by the Ld. Lower Revenue ... rightly and validly decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 16. The claim of the assessee in the cross objection is: ITA No.2350/M/2023 & CO No.104/M/2023 9 M/s. Larsen & Toubro Limited “As to whether deduction claimed by the assessee on account of stamp duty and registration charges of Rs.43