← 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-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Avin Rajendrakumar Agrawal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 84/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

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

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

No.43/Mum/2024 Avin Rajendrakumar Agrawal आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH: The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue and the cross objection by the assessee against the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2014–15, arising ... gain declared by the assessee on sale of shares as bogus and taxable under section 68 of the Act. The assessee, by way of cross objection, has challenged the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. 3. The brief facts, as borne out from

Aggarwal Agro Industries, Karnal vs. ITO-Ward-1, Karnal

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

ITA 2544/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manav Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 69C

upon the sound logic, then the order of adjudication cannot be interfered with and also relying on other decisions, he did not allow the cross objection. 6. In this case, Assessing Officer observed that during the search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act dated 23.05.2017, Shri Hitesh Jain

Income Tax Officer-34(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Pinky Himanshu Acharya, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed, whereas the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6537/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusetha.Y. : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri D.R. Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Ld. Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250

Date of Pronouncement : 29-12-2025 2 & C.O. No. 303/MUM/2025 O R D E R Per: Narender Kumar Choudhry, JM: Instant appealand cross objection have been preferred by the Revenueagainst the order dated 28-08-2025 impugned herein, passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short „NFAC ... Revenue somehow is in appeal before this court, on various aspects mentioned above, whereas the assessee by filing Cross Objection has also challenged the decision of the Ld. Commissioner 3 & C.O. No. 303/MUM/2025 more or less on the ground that AO erred in taking sanction/approval for issuance of notice

ACIT Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Khadamat Integrated Solutions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3766/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250

there is delay of 94 days in filing of the CO on which the Assessee has claimed as under: 1. Kindly refer to the cross objection filed by the appellant for. A.Y. 2016-17 on 15.04.2025 before the Hon'ble Tribunal against the order of Ed. CIT(A) dated ... submitted that the department appeal memo was received by the appellant on 12.12.2024. Accordingly, the present cross objections were due to be filed on or before 11.01.2025. Since, the cross objections are filed on 15.04.2025, there is a delay of 94 days [3 months and 4 days] in filing

Asia Today Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 1403/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Asia Today Limited, Asst. Director Of Income C/O. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Tax (International Ltd., Vs. Taxation)-2(2), 135, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Scindia House, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Bellard Estate, Pan: Aabca0249F Mumbai - 400039 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.01.2007, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2004-05. 2. The Relevant Facts For Adjudication Of This Appeal Are As Under: The Assessee, Being A Foreign Telecasting Company Incorporated In Mauritius & Having Tax Residency Certificate Of Mauritius , During The Ay Under Consideration Was Engaged In The Production & Acquiring Rights Of Various Television Films Including Feature Films, As A Copy Right Owner/Holder Of Various Hindi Feature Films Produced & Censored In India, As Mentioned In Schedule ‘C’ Annexed With The ‘Agreement Of 2 M/S Asia Today Ltd. Vs Asst. Dit (Int. Taxation)-2(2)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

Therefore, there is no need to differ from the findings of the CIT (A) and accordingly the Revenue Appeal is dismissed. 12) In the cross objection, the assessee is contesting about the findings of the CIT (A) that the general principles of section 9(1)(i) will apply ... inclusion under section 9(1)(vi) and relied on the two decisions of the Gujarat and Madras High Courts referred (supra). Even though the cross objection was raised on findings of CIT(A), in view of the observations given above, we are of the opinion that the issue is only

Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Delhi vs. Sunita Gadde, Delhi

ITA 2111/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Sunita Gadde, Ward-10(1), H. No. 16A, Dlf, Chhattarpur, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Acmpg4589J (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.225/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2111/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Sunita Gadde, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 5A/3A, Ansari Road, Ward-10(1), Darya Ganj, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Acmpg4589J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Pranshu Goel, Ca Sh. Aditya Gupta, Adv. Department By Sh. Gouranga Chandra Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.2111/Del/2025 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No.225/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In

Section 143(3)

Date of hearing 10.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.12.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This Revenue’s appeal ITA No.2111/Del/2025 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.225/Del/2025 for assessment year 2012- 13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in ITA No.2111/Del/2025 & C.O. No.225/Del/2025 short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi ... tribunal as well as in the hon’ble jurisdictional high court (supra). Rejected accordingly. The Revenue fails in ITA No.2111/Del/2025 therefore. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 225/Del/2025 stands rendered academic. 6. To sum up, this Revenue’s appeal ITA No.2111/Del/2025 and the assessee’s cross objection

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Welspun Enterprises Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3625/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Kapadia & Ajay Nagpal, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

Revenue is dismissed. Page | 11 ITA No. 3625/Mum/2024 Α.Υ. 2013-14 Welspun Enterprises Limited, Mumbai 9. The assessee during the hearing raised certain cross objections challenging the validity of the assessment order. However, the same stand dismissed as the assessee has been allowed full relief on merits

Dy.CIT Cent. Cir -6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Ashok B. Jiwarjka, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed and the cross

ITA 2355/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Mohan (SR-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Ashok B. Jiwrajka ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These captioned appeals have been filed by the revenue and the cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 54, Mumbai (‘Id. CIT(A)' for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income ... giving accommodation entry in the guise of bogus capital gain from penny stock. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the cross objection No. 64/Mum/2022 and 67/Mum/2022 which are as follows:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income

Dy.C.I, T. Cent. Cir -6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Ashok B. Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed and the cross

ITA 2353/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Mohan (SR-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Ashok B. Jiwrajka ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These captioned appeals have been filed by the revenue and the cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 54, Mumbai (‘ld. CIT(A)' for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income ... giving accommodation entry in the guise of bogus capital gain from penny stock. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the cross objection No. 64/Mum/2022 and 67/Mum/2022 which are as follows:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir -6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Ashok B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed and the cross

ITA 2352/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Mohan (SR-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Ashok B. Jiwrajka ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These captioned appeals have been filed by the revenue and the cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 54, Mumbai (‘ld. CIT(A)' for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income ... giving accommodation entry in the guise of bogus capital gain from penny stock. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the cross objection No. 64/Mum/2022 and 67/Mum/2022 which are as follows:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income

Dy C.I.T. Cent Cir -6(2), `Mumbai vs. Shri Ashok B. Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2351/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Mohan (SR-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Ashok B. Jiwrajka ORDER Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These captioned appeals have been filed by the revenue and the cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 54, Mumbai (‘ld. CIT(A)' for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income ... giving accommodation entry in the guise of bogus capital gain from penny stock. 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the cross objection No. 64/Mum/2022 and 67/Mum/2022 which are as follows:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income

ACIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Jagat Projects Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s cross objections C

ITA 1981/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Date of pronouncement O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant Revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s cross-objections are directed against the order dated 27.06.2022 passed by the CIT(Appeals)-27, New 2 Delhi, in turn arising out of order dated 29.12.2017 under Section ... alter, amend or forego any ground(s) of appeal raised above at the time of hearing.” 3. The assessee has raised following grounds of cross objections: “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in sustaining an addition

DCIT Central Circle-01, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 5793/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

ACIT, Central Circle- 1, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corporation, Kolkata

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

ITA 2369/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CC- 1, New Delhi

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

ITA 1893/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

ACIT, CC- 1, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 5534/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

ACIT, CC- 1, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 5505/DEL/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

ACIT, CC- 1, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 5504/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

ACIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd, Lucknow

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

ITA 4855/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that

Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CC- 1, New Delhi

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

ITA 4731/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

Assessee) 67. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2016-17 and the assessee in Cross Objection is tabulated as under:- Sr No Issue Ground no. in appeal Ground no. in appeal of the assessee of the Department 1 Disallowance u/s.14A ... said grounds are dismissed for parity of reasons. Addition on Account of Notional Income:- 70. The solitary issue raised by the assessee in cross objections is against addition of Rs.94,83,439/- confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of Notional Interest. The contention of the assessee is that