← 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 CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 557/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 556/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 555/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 553/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

Dy CIT, CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd., (in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Loquidator)

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 313/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

ITO Ward - 32(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Genmal Jaswantlal Choudhary, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 162/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, MG Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 PAN: AACCC-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Cross Objections No.158, 159, 160, 161 & 162/MUM/2021 [Arising out of ITA No. ITA NOS.313,557,556,555&553/MUM/2021 ... Date of hearing : 17/03/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date of pronouncement : 13/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER BENCH: These five appeals by the Revenue and Cross Objections by the assessee are directed against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]for the assessment years

Dy CIT CC-2(3), Mumbai vs. Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as cross- objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1278/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Central Circle-2(3), Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Prathishtha 401, Deepak Bldg. 3Rd Floor, S.V. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Vs. Road, Vile Parle-W, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aahps 5253 J Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 12/Mum/2022 (Ita No. 1278/Mum/2021) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Dcit Central Circle-2(3), 401, Deepak Bldg. 3Rd Floor, S.V. Road, Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Vile Parle-W, Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400056. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahps 5253 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rajan Vora, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Achal Sharma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/06/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan Vora, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271DSection 69A

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for alleged taken cash loan. The assessee is before the Tribunal by way of cross objection in the appeal of the Revenue in quantum proceedings in ITA No. 1278/Mum/2021. The issue-in-dispute involved in these appeals and cross-objection being connected ... issue-in-dispute and accordingly we uphold the same. The grounds of the appeal of the Revenue are accordingly dismissed. 8. As far as cross-objection of the assessee is concerned same are rendered academic in nature and therefore accordingly dismissed as infructuous. 9. In the result, the appeals

Dy CIT CC-2(3), Mumbai vs. Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as cross- objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1277/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Central Circle-2(3), Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Prathishtha 401, Deepak Bldg. 3Rd Floor, S.V. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Vs. Road, Vile Parle-W, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aahps 5253 J Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 12/Mum/2022 (Ita No. 1278/Mum/2021) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vipul Dilipbhai Shah, Dcit Central Circle-2(3), 401, Deepak Bldg. 3Rd Floor, S.V. Road, Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Vile Parle-W, Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400056. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahps 5253 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rajan Vora, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Achal Sharma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/06/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan Vora, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 271DSection 69A

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for alleged taken cash loan. The assessee is before the Tribunal by way of cross objection in the appeal of the Revenue in quantum proceedings in ITA No. 1278/Mum/2021. The issue-in-dispute involved in these appeals and cross-objection being connected ... issue-in-dispute and accordingly we uphold the same. The grounds of the appeal of the Revenue are accordingly dismissed. 8. As far as cross-objection of the assessee is concerned same are rendered academic in nature and therefore accordingly dismissed as infructuous. 9. In the result, the appeals