← 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

DCIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi vs. Caddie Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1723/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

Appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the PCIT, Gurgaon dated 29.03.2019 for A.Y 2014 -15. Cross Objection by the assessee is preferred for A.Y 2015-16. All these appeals and cross objection were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake ... convenience and brevity. 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee withdrew Cross Objections filed by the assessee. Therefore, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The peculiar facts for A.Y 2014-15 are that the impugned appeal by the Revenue in ITA No. 1721/DEL/2022

DCIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi vs. Caddie Hotels P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1722/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

Appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the PCIT, Gurgaon dated 29.03.2019 for A.Y 2014 -15. Cross Objection by the assessee is preferred for A.Y 2015-16. All these appeals and cross objection were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake ... convenience and brevity. 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee withdrew Cross Objections filed by the assessee. Therefore, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The peculiar facts for A.Y 2014-15 are that the impugned appeal by the Revenue in ITA No. 1721/DEL/2022

DCIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi vs. Caddie Hotels P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1721/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

Appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the PCIT, Gurgaon dated 29.03.2019 for A.Y 2014 -15. Cross Objection by the assessee is preferred for A.Y 2015-16. All these appeals and cross objection were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake ... convenience and brevity. 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee withdrew Cross Objections filed by the assessee. Therefore, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The peculiar facts for A.Y 2014-15 are that the impugned appeal by the Revenue in ITA No. 1721/DEL/2022

Caddie Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT Central Circle 17, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2014/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

Appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the PCIT, Gurgaon dated 29.03.2019 for A.Y 2014 -15. Cross Objection by the assessee is preferred for A.Y 2015-16. All these appeals and cross objection were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake ... convenience and brevity. 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee withdrew Cross Objections filed by the assessee. Therefore, the same are dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The peculiar facts for A.Y 2014-15 are that the impugned appeal by the Revenue in ITA No. 1721/DEL/2022

ACIT Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Holeon Traders Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of revenue are partly allowed and cross objections of assessee are dismissed

ITA 4958/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv
Section 68

Revenue For : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 13.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21.07.2023 ORDER PER BENCH:- Above captioned appeals of revenue and cross objection of assessee have been filed against the order of CIT(A)-29 New Delhi dated 29.03.2013 for 2012-13 to 2016- 17. ITA Nos.4958 ... dismissed and ground no. 2 of revenue is allowed. 10. The ld. counsel submitted that the assessee does not want to press its cross objection for all five years therefore cross objections of assessee for 2012-13 to 2016- 17 are dismissed as not pressed. 11. In the result

ACIT, Circle- 14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Akshay Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 2924/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit, Circle – 14(1)(1), Vs. M/S. Akshay Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 102, Siddhivinayak Mk Road, Chsl, Tilak Nagar, Mumbai- 400020. Chembur, Mumbai-400089 Pan/Gir No. : Aahca2331A Appellant .. Respondent Cross Objection No. 53/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/S. Akshay Vs. Acit, Circle – 14(1)(1), Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. Room No. 432, 4Th 102, Siddhivinayak Floor, Aayakar Chsl, Tilak Nagar, Bhavan, Chembur, Mk Road, Mumbai-400089 Mumbai- 400020. Pan/Gir No. : Aahca2331A Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Mr.Ajaysingh&Mr.Yogeshjoijode,Ar Revenue By : Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh,Dr Date Of Hearing 13.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Mr.AjaySingh&Mr.YogeshJoijode,ARFor Respondent: Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh,DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 43C

Floor, Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 102, Siddhivinayak MK Road, CHSL, Tilak Nagar, Mumbai- 400020. Chembur, Mumbai-400089 PAN/GIR No. : AAHCA2331A Appellant .. Respondent Cross Objection No. 53/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s. Akshay Vs. ACIT, Circle – 14(1)(1), Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. Room No. 432, 4th 102, Siddhivinayak Floor, Aayakar CHSL ... against the order of the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Act and the assessee has filed cross objections. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 150 days in filing the cross

ACIT, Central Circle- 4, New Delhi vs. Sanjay Duggal, Faridabad

ITA 3532/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

For Appellant: “1. The
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

JUDICIAL MEMBER Asst. CIT Sh. Sanjay Duggal Central Circle-04 3-E/42, N.I.T. New Delhi Vs. Faridabad-121 001 PAN-AESPD 6712J (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.133/Del/2018 Arising out of ITA No.3532/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) Sh. Sanjay Duggal Asst. CIT 3-E/42, N.I.T. Central Circle-04 Faridabad ... order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurogaon [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 27.02.2018 for Assessment Year 2009-10. The Cross Objection has also been filed by the assessee. Page 1 of 6 ITA No.3539/Del/2018 & C.O.133/Del/2018 ACIT vs. Sanjay Duggal 2. The following grounds has been raised

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. Shri Gaurav Kumar Agrawal, Raigarh

ITA 95/RPR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.95/Rpr/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2019-2020) Acit (Central), Bilaspur Vs Shri Gaurav Kumar Agrawal, Near Lal Tank, Bus Stand Road, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan No. : Ahhpa 2629 P & Cross Objection No.04/Rpr/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.95/Rpr/2021) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shri Gaurav Kumar Agrawal, Vs Acit (Central), Bilaspur Near Lal Tank, Bus Stand Road, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan No. : Ahhpa 2629 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

ACIT (Central), Bilaspur Vs Shri Gaurav Kumar Agrawal, Near Lal Tank, Bus Stand Road, Raigarh (C.G.) PAN No. : AHHPA 2629 P AND Cross Objection No.04/RPR/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.95/RPR/2021) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shri Gaurav Kumar Agrawal, Vs ACIT (Central), Bilaspur Near Lal Tank, Bus Stand ... been preferred by the Revenue. We notice that a typographical mistake is apparent in the Cause Title of the order dated 17.07.2023, wherein, the Cross Objection number has been inadvertently typed as “C.O. No. 08/RPR/2018” instead of “C.O. No. 4/RPR/2022”. Hence, this corrigendum is being issued to correct the mistake

Bhandari Gold and Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeal), NFAC - Delhi

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

ITA 1619/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 6(1)(2) V. M/S. Bandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 407, Bussaudyog Bhavan Room No. 538B, 5Th Floor Tokersi, Jivraj Road, Sewree Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400015 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcb1291J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

same is upheld. Page No. | 35 ITA NO. 1564& 1619/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2017-18) M/s. Bandari Gold and Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., The assessee filed cross objections supporting the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous

Cy. CIT 6(1) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1564/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 6(1)(2) V. M/S. Bandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 407, Bussaudyog Bhavan Room No. 538B, 5Th Floor Tokersi, Jivraj Road, Sewree Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400015 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcb1291J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

same is upheld. Page No. | 35 ITA NO. 1564& 1619/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2017-18) M/s. Bandari Gold and Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., The assessee filed cross objections supporting the order of the Id. CIT(A). Since, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, the cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infructuous

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Gurgaon vs. Jethmal Mehta, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AYs

ITA 8987/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2014-15
Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153CSection 68

Jethmal Mehta Central Circle-1 J-398, Indian Overseas Gurugram Vs. Bank Building] New Rajender Nagar New Delhi PAN-AETPM 7817A (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.160/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8985/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Cross Objection No.161/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8986/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) Cross Objection No.162/Del/2022 ... hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 28/03/2016 for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. Whereas, the assessee also filed Cross Objections in all these appeals. 2. The common grounds raised by the Revenue in these three appeals i.e. ITA No.8985, 8986, 8987/Del/2019

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Gurgaon vs. Jethmal Mehta, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AYs

ITA 8986/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2013-14
Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153CSection 68

Jethmal Mehta Central Circle-1 J-398, Indian Overseas Gurugram Vs. Bank Building] New Rajender Nagar New Delhi PAN-AETPM 7817A (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.160/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8985/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Cross Objection No.161/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8986/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) Cross Objection No.162/Del/2022 ... hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 28/03/2016 for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. Whereas, the assessee also filed Cross Objections in all these appeals. 2. The common grounds raised by the Revenue in these three appeals i.e. ITA No.8985, 8986, 8987/Del/2019

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Gurgaon vs. Jethmal Mehta, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AYs

ITA 8985/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2012-13
Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153CSection 68

Jethmal Mehta Central Circle-1 J-398, Indian Overseas Gurugram Vs. Bank Building] New Rajender Nagar New Delhi PAN-AETPM 7817A (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.160/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8985/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Cross Objection No.161/Del/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.8986/Del/2019) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) Cross Objection No.162/Del/2022 ... hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 28/03/2016 for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. Whereas, the assessee also filed Cross Objections in all these appeals. 2. The common grounds raised by the Revenue in these three appeals i.e. ITA No.8985, 8986, 8987/Del/2019

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Hi-Tech Abrasive Private Limited, Raipur

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 142/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.142/Rpr/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Acit, Circle-2(1), Raipur Vs Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. 740, Sector-B, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur Pan No. :Aaach 5950 M & Cross Objection No.14/Rpr/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.142/Rpr/2018) (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Raipur 740, Sector-B, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur Pan No. :Aaach 5950 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 50

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Raipur Vs Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. 740, Sector-B, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur PAN No. :AAACH 5950 M AND Cross Objection No.14/RPR/2018 (Arising out of ITA No.142/RPR/2018) (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-2(1), Raipur 740, Sector ... which was received by the Registry on 04.10.2022 regarding admission of additional ground, which reads as under:- “Without prejudice to the other grounds of cross objection, the assessee is entitled for depreciation at Rs. 49,04,386/- which was claimed at Rs. 26,75,615/- in the return and allowed

DCIT Central Circle Ajmer, Ajmer vs. Yashwant Kumar Sharma, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 210/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 210/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2020-21 DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer cuke Vs. Yashwant Kumar Sharma F-108, Industrial Area, Makhupura Parbatpura, Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ASWPS 3791 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@C.O. No. 04/JP/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 210/JP/2023) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2020-21 Yashwant Kumar Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. C. M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. James Kurian (CIT) &
Section 139(1)Section 271ASection 274

k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 10/07/2023 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal filed by the revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax 2 ITA Nos. 210/JP/2023 & CO No. 04/JP/2023 DCIT, Ajmer ... Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 30.03.2022. 2. Since the issues involved in this appeal filed by the revenue and cross objections of the assessee relates the assessee for the same assessment year and the grounds of the appeal and CO are interconnected were heard together with

Meenu Ajay Pathak, Mumbai vs. I.T.O.- 32(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 155/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 234ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

earned commission for doing the work of the entry provider. Further, as regards the request of the assessee to grant of the cross objection of Mr. Vipul Vidur Bhatt, the AO issued summons under section 131 of the Act to Mr. Vipul Vidur Bhatt on 12/12/2017, to attend the office

DCIT, Central Circle -15, New Delhi vs. B.L.Kashyap & Sons Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2622/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 The Dcit, Centralcircle-15, New Delhi M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., 409, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-A, Jasola, 110055 Vs. New Delhi 110025 Pan Aaacb 0205 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 174/Del/2022 In Ita No.2622/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., The Dcit, Centralcircle-15, New Delhi 409, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-A, Jasola, 110055 New Delhi 110025 Vs. Pan Aaacb 0205 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sourav Rohtagi, CA
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)

Sapna Bhatia, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 12.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. Above captioned appeals of revenue and cross objection of assessee have been filed against the order of CIT(A)-28 New Delhi dated 29.08.2022 for AY 2019-20. 2. The grounds ... Commissioner of Income Tax-1 dated 13.10.2022 in Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016. 3. The grounds raised by assessee in cross objection are as follows:- 1. That the additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by passing the order under Section 143(1) are illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction

ACIT Circle-2(1), Ghaziabad vs. Manoj Raizada, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 5/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18 & Co No. 28/Del/2021 Asstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Choudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 37(1)Section 46ASection 9

Hearing: 01.05.2023 Date of 18.07..2023 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ghaziabad (“CIT(A)”) dated 07.09.2020 pertaining ... reject them. 16. Ground No. 10 is of general nature. 17. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 18. We now take up Cross Objection of the assessee which are as under:- “1. That the Ld. AO has misinterpreted the Application filed under Rule 46A by the Respondent

DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi vs. Centum Learning Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and cross objection of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6236/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit, Circle-5(2), New Delhi M/S. Centum Learning Ltd., 110002 127, Neel Gagan, Mandi Road, Vs. Sultanpur, Mehrauli, New Delhi 110030 Pan Aadcb 3842 R

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CA
Section 14A

Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. Above captioned appeals of revenue and cross objection of assessee have been filed against the order of CIT(A)-2 New Delhi dated 12.04.2019 for AY 2011-12. 2. The grounds of revenue ... that the assessee did not submit any proof regarding its allowability under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The grounds raised by assessee in cross objection are as follows:- 1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in upholding the action of the learned Assessing

Addi. CIT Special Range-3, New Delhi vs. Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 7339/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 7339/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Acit, Vs. M/S. Ebony Retail Holdings Special Range-3, Ltd. New Delhi F-2/1, Khanpur Extension, New Delhi-110062 Pan : Aaacd0207B Appellant Respondent

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal. 5.1 While the assessee has raised following grounds in the cross objections ; “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the Law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance ... arising out of appeal of Revenue is decided against the Revenue. Ground no. 2 in appeal of Revenue and Ground no 1 of Cross objections; 9. Ld. DR has relied the findings of Ld. AO and submitted that Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider there was diversion of resources