“cross objection”

Richa Finance & Investment Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office Ward 15(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed and the addition u/s 68 for Rs

Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

observations of CIT(A) and ITAT that respondent had discharged the onus explaining the transactions. 11. Ld. AR also raised the issue that cross objection of Shri Chandrashekhar Goyal during the search in the case of Shri Pravin Jain was not provided to the assessee, which was the sole basis

DCIT CC 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Om Trilok Realty & Infrastructure, Mumbai

Bench: Shree Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Deputy Commissioner M/S Om Trilok Realty & Of Income Tax, Cc-7(3), Infrastructures, Shop No. 6Th Room No. 655, 8, Botawala Building, V Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 82086, Raghavji Road, S M. K. Road, Mumbai- Gowalia Tank, 400020, Maharashtra Mumbai-400036 Pan No. Aabfo8779M (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta : Shri R A Dhyani, Cit-Dr Respondent By : 17.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of : 10.12.2025 Pronouncement

2163/Mum/2019) filed by the Revenue, it is respectfully submitted that the appeal was dismissed on account of low tax effect, as noted in Cross Objection No. 70/Mum/2020 xii. CIT(A)'s order for A.Y. 2012-13 was upheld by Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in assessee's group concem Lotus Logistics

Income Tax Officer-23(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tisya Jewels, Mumbai

In the result, both the Revenues appeal and Cross

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Tisya Jewels, Mumbai आदेश / ORDER PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [Α.Μ.] :- The above captioned appeals preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objections of the assessee emanate from the orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)"] pertaining ... appeal as well. 11. In the result, both the above appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes. 12. The assessee has filed Cross objections vide C.O. No.67/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2011-12) (Arising out of ITA No. 790/MUM/2025) and C.O. No.68/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11)(arising out of ITA No. 791/MUM/2025

Income Tax Officer- 23(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tisya Jewels, Mumbai

In the result, both the Revenues appeal and Cross

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Tisya Jewels, Mumbai आदेश / ORDER PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [Α.Μ.] :- The above captioned appeals preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objections of the assessee emanate from the orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)"] pertaining ... appeal as well. 11. In the result, both the above appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes. 12. The assessee has filed Cross objections vide C.O. No.67/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2011-12) (Arising out of ITA No. 790/MUM/2025) and C.O. No.68/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11)(arising out of ITA No. 791/MUM/2025

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Lloyds Steels Industries Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

these activities cannot be allowed as a deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” “Grounds of C.O. The following grounds of cross objections are without prejudice to each other and assessee's arguments in Department's appeal, 1. The CIT(A) has erred in upholding the assessment

Lloyds Engineering Works Limited (Earlier Known As Loyds Steels Industries Limited ), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

these activities cannot be allowed as a deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” “Grounds of C.O. The following grounds of cross objections are without prejudice to each other and assessee's arguments in Department's appeal, 1. The CIT(A) has erred in upholding the assessment