← 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Bharat Giridharilal Rughani, Mumbai

ITA 1514/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Bench: Aforesaid appeals filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue) and cross objections filed by Shri Bharat Girdharlal Rughani (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) challenging the impugned orders having identical question of facts and law are taken ... alter any of the ground of appeal, if need be.” 3. The cross objector Shri Girdharlal (the assessee) by filing the cross objections for A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 sought to challenge the impugned orders all dated 14.02.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) by raising identically worded grounds

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Bharat Giridharilal Rughani, Mumbai

ITA 1513/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Bench: Aforesaid appeals filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue) and cross objections filed by Shri Bharat Girdharlal Rughani (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) challenging the impugned orders having identical question of facts and law are taken ... alter any of the ground of appeal, if need be.” 3. The cross objector Shri Girdharlal (the assessee) by filing the cross objections for A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 sought to challenge the impugned orders all dated 14.02.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) by raising identically worded grounds

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Bharat Giridharilal Rughani, Mumbai

ITA 1512/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Bench: Aforesaid appeals filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue) and cross objections filed by Shri Bharat Girdharlal Rughani (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) challenging the impugned orders having identical question of facts and law are taken ... alter any of the ground of appeal, if need be.” 3. The cross objector Shri Girdharlal (the assessee) by filing the cross objections for A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 sought to challenge the impugned orders all dated 14.02.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) by raising identically worded grounds

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Bharat Giridharilal Rughani, Mumbai

ITA 1511/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Bench: Aforesaid appeals filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue) and cross objections filed by Shri Bharat Girdharlal Rughani (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) challenging the impugned orders having identical question of facts and law are taken ... alter any of the ground of appeal, if need be.” 3. The cross objector Shri Girdharlal (the assessee) by filing the cross objections for A.Y. 2013-14 to 2016-17 sought to challenge the impugned orders all dated 14.02.2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) by raising identically worded grounds

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 12(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Group M Media (India) Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are stand dismissed

ITA 3087/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhco No. 137/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2011-12) Group M Media (India) Vs. Dcit-12(2)(2) Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 145, 1 St Floor, 8Th Floor, Commerz Aayakar Bhavan, International Business M.K. Road, Park, Oberoi Garden Mumbai-400020 City, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccm7365H Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-12(2)(2) Vs. Group M Media (India) Room No. 145, 1 St Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 8Th Floor, Commerz M.K. Road, International Business Mumbai-400020 Park, Oberoi Garden City, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccm7365H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Nikhil Tiwari Respondent By : Shri. Ganesh Rakh Date Of Hearing 27.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.10 .2023

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh Rakh
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH :- 1. All the appeals comprising appeal filed by the revenue and another appeal and cross objection filed by the assessee are pertained to assessment year 2011-12 directed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-20, Mumbai [hereinafter ... issue of disallowance of notional interest of ₹4,95,57,893/- vide order ITA No. 3087/Mum/2019 as supra in this order, therefore, this cross objection filed by the assessee has become infructuous and the same stand dismissed. 24. In the result the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Bhrathi Consumer Care Products Pvt Ltd, Guntur

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

ITA 249/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 249/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Bharathi Consumer Care Central Circle-1, Products Private Limited, 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Sy. No. 280, 281, Peddaparimi Lakshmipuram Main Road, Village, Nidumukkala Post, Guntur-522007, Guntur – 522016, Andhra Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aadcb 9107 B (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 17/Viz/2023 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 249/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) M/S. Bharathi Consumer Care Vs. Dcit, Products Private Limited, Central Circle-1, Sy. No. 280, 281, Peddaparimi 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Village, Nidumukkala Post, Lakshmipuram Main Road, Guntur – 522016, Guntur-522007, Andhra Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aadcb 9107 B (Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satya Sai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 269SSection 271DSection 68

other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. Further, we also find that the assessee has filed the Cross Objection by raising the following grounds: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is justified in finding that the facts as contained in Hon’ble Supreme Court ... penalty order passed U/s. 271D is invalid in law as there is no satisfaction written in the Assessment Order. 7. Any other ground of cross objections that may be raised at the time of hearing.” 4. At the outset, the Ld. AR pleaded that Ground No.6 of the Cross Objection

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Polisetty Somasundaram Pvt Ltd, Guntur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection raised by the assessee is disposed off as mentioned herein above

ITA 248/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.248/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Polisetty Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Somasundaram Pvt Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, D.No. 3-30-17, Sundaram Lakshmipuram Main Road, Colony, Ring Road, Guntur-522 007, Gujjanagundla, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh-522006. Pan: Aabcp 3168 Q (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 03/Viz/2023 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.248/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16) M/S. Polisetty Somasundaram Pvt Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle-1, D.No. 3-30-17, Sundaram Colony, 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Ring Road, Gujjanagundla, Lakshmipuram Main Road, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522006. Guntur-522 007, Pan: Aabcp 3168 Q Andhra Pradesh. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr Satya Sai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for the AY 2015-16. The assessee has filed cross objections. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in trading of Tobacco and filed its return of income ... ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 4. Further, we also find that the assessee has raised the following grounds of cross objections: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is justified in holding that the addition of Rs. 17,71,40,620/- made by the Assessing Officer towards

DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hind Aluminium Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1904/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2013-14
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

Date of Pronouncement 30/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Department and cross objection by the assessee passed by ld. CIT (A)-56 Mumbai 2 ITA No.1904/Mum/2023 & CO No.107/Mum/2023 M/s. Hind Aluminium Industries Ltd. in order dated 27/03/2023 ... Length However, in doing so, the 3% should have been applied on transactional level and not at an aggregate level." 3. Whereas in cross objection the assessee has raised following grounds:- 1. Ommission of Clause (i) to Section 92BA 1.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-56, Mumbai

Merck Specialities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, (a) both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3261/MUM/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

Date of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH:- The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objections filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and they relate to the assessment years ... year of amalgamation. Accordingly, following the same, we uphold the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 15. The assessee has filed cross objections in both the years. The Ld A.R submitted that they are in support of the decisions rendered by Ld CIT(A) in granting reliefs

Merck Specialiities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, (a) both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3260/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

Date of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH:- The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objections filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and they relate to the assessment years ... year of amalgamation. Accordingly, following the same, we uphold the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 15. The assessee has filed cross objections in both the years. The Ld A.R submitted that they are in support of the decisions rendered by Ld CIT(A) in granting reliefs

Dy.CIT, Circle-7(1)(1, Mumbai vs. M/S Merck Specialities Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, (a) both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3198/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

Date of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH:- The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objections filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and they relate to the assessment years ... year of amalgamation. Accordingly, following the same, we uphold the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 15. The assessee has filed cross objections in both the years. The Ld A.R submitted that they are in support of the decisions rendered by Ld CIT(A) in granting reliefs

Dy.CIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Merck Specialities Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, (a) both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3197/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

Date of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH:- The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objections filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and they relate to the assessment years ... year of amalgamation. Accordingly, following the same, we uphold the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 15. The assessee has filed cross objections in both the years. The Ld A.R submitted that they are in support of the decisions rendered by Ld CIT(A) in granting reliefs

Income Tax Officer-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Sohni Depak Tanna, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2245/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm C.O.No. 135/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Assessee By : Shri. Madhur Agrawal & Pankaj Jain Revenue By : Shri. Kishor Dhule Date Of Hearing: 03.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal & PankajFor Respondent: Shri. Kishor Dhule
Section 10Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 68

income tax officer – 1 (1) (1), Mumbai (the learned AO) (ITA number 2245/M/2022) and Mrs Sohni Deepak Tanna (the assessee) has filed cross objection number 135/M/2022 for assessment year 2014 – 15 against A.Y. 2014-15 Sohni Dipak Tanna the appellate order passed by National faceless appeal Centre (and FAC capital ... garb of long- term capital gain exempt under section 10 (38) of the act 03. Assessee has also raised the ground in Cross objection that the National faceless appeal Centre erred in upholding the reopening of the assessment under section 148 by the income tax officer. The assessee submits that

ACIT (Central)-II, Bhopal vs. M/S Fortune Builders, Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and cross objections of the

ITA 233/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central)-2, M/S.Fortune Soumya Bhopal Housing, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue /Appellant ) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aacff1234H

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These two appeals by the Revenue and equal numbers of cross objections by two assessees are directed against the two separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A) both dated 27th March, 2023 for the assessment years ... Since the issue involved in these appeals and cross objections are common and arising from the identical facts and circumstances of two groups concerns’ case, therefore, these two appeals and cross objections are heard together and disposed of by this composite order. Page 2 of 9 ACIT ,Central-2, Bhopal

The ACIT Central -2, Bhopal vs. M/S Fortune Soumya Housing, Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and cross objections of the

ITA 232/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central)-2, M/S.Fortune Soumya Bhopal Housing, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue /Appellant ) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aacff1234H

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

Hearing 25.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per Bench: These two appeals by the Revenue and equal numbers of cross objections by two assessees are directed against the two separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A) both dated 27th March, 2023 for the assessment years ... Since the issue involved in these appeals and cross objections are common and arising from the identical facts and circumstances of two groups concerns’ case, therefore, these two appeals and cross objections are heard together and disposed of by this composite order. Page 2 of 9 ACIT ,Central-2, Bhopal

Dy.DIT., (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. Global Cricket Corporation Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the

ITA 4990/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Dy. Cit(It) – 3(1) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. Scindia House, R. No. 132, 1St Floor, C/O. S. R. Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18Th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. The Dy. Dit (It)-3(1) C/O. S R B C & Associates Mumbai- 400 038 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Vs. 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri P J Pardiwala/Aarati Sathe Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma : 16.10.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2023

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 PAN/GIR No. AABCG 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising out of ITA No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/s. Global Cricket Corpn ... decided this issue on the legal ground, the other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and the Revenue become academic in nature. The cross objection filed by the assessee also becomes infructuous. 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed

The ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the

ITA 171/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Dy. Cit(It) – 3(1) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. Scindia House, R. No. 132, 1St Floor, C/O. S. R. Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18Th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/S. Global Cricket Corpn Pte Ltd. The Dy. Dit (It)-3(1) C/O. S R B C & Associates Mumbai- 400 038 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Vs. 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No. Aabcg 7951 L (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri P J Pardiwala/Aarati Sathe Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma : 16.10.2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2023

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 9(1)(vi)

Batliboi & Co. Vs. 18th Floor, Express Towers, N. M. Road, Mumbai- 38 Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 PAN/GIR No. AABCG 7951 L (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No. 83/Mum/2012 (Arising out of ITA No.4990/Mum/2011) (Assessment Year: 2003-04) M/s. Global Cricket Corpn ... decided this issue on the legal ground, the other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and the Revenue become academic in nature. The cross objection filed by the assessee also becomes infructuous. 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed

Sumer Singh Yadav, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1906/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 250Section 254

Faridabad, New Delhi Haryana PAN :AFSPC1241A (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing 10.10.2023 Date of pronouncement 18.10.2023 ORDER 2. The grounds raised in the cross-objections are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order is null and void as the same is in violation ... absence of any incriminating material being found during the course of search.” 3. As could be seen from ground no. 1 in the cross objections, the issue raised is a purely legal and jurisdictional going to the root of the matter. Therefore, we propose to deal with the issue

Smt.Saudamini Sharma, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1896/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 250Section 254

Faridabad, New Delhi Haryana PAN :AFSPC1241A (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing 10.10.2023 Date of pronouncement 18.10.2023 ORDER 2. The grounds raised in the cross-objections are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order is null and void as the same is in violation ... absence of any incriminating material being found during the course of search.” 3. As could be seen from ground no. 1 in the cross objections, the issue raised is a purely legal and jurisdictional going to the root of the matter. Therefore, we propose to deal with the issue

Smt.Saudamini Sharma, Haryana vs. DCIT-Centrel Circle-7, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1895/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 250Section 254

Faridabad, New Delhi Haryana PAN :AFSPC1241A (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing 10.10.2023 Date of pronouncement 18.10.2023 ORDER 2. The grounds raised in the cross-objections are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order is null and void as the same is in violation ... absence of any incriminating material being found during the course of search.” 3. As could be seen from ground no. 1 in the cross objections, the issue raised is a purely legal and jurisdictional going to the root of the matter. Therefore, we propose to deal with the issue