“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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, Mumbai vs. Ramesh Pannalal Ranawat, Mumbai

ITA 5782/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Dcit-17(1) Ramesh Pannalal Ranawat Room No. 232 Rahul Ramesh Ranawat Kautilya Bhavan Vs. (Legal Heir Of Late Ramesh Bandra Kurla Pannalal Ranawat) Complex, Bandra 1St Floor, Rangwala Building East 13/15, Dhamji Street Mumbai-400 051. Kalbadevi, Mumbai-400 003. Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 6/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year : 2015-16)

For Respondent: Shri Dharan Gandhi &

Section 133ASection 143(3)

addition made by Ld. AO on account of undisclosed sales of Rs. 11.78 crore. For the same assessment year, the appellant has filed a cross objection stating that the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act by Ld. AO is bad-in-law and the assessment ... Ramesh Pannalal Ranawat) 2. Since the assessment year involved is the same and issues involved are same, the Income Tax Appeal of Revenue and cross objection filed by appellant are clubbed and a single order is passed. 3. In this case, the appellant is a manufacturer and dealer in gold

DCIT Circle 43(1), New Delhi vs. Charu Goel, Delhi

In the result,the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 4863/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4863/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Charu Goel, Circle 43(1), 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Co No.16/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4863/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Charu Goel, Dcit, 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, Vs. Circle 43(1), 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F Civic Centre, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

case of Rajiv Bansal vs. Union of India & Ors., Civil Appeal No.8629 of 2024, order dated 03.10.2024.” 1.3 The assessee has also filed a Cross Objection (CO No.16/Del/2025) in support of the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 2. Before us the Ld. DR argued on the merits ... merit of the case. Furthermore, since the appeal of the Revenue has been dismissed, we do not deem it fit to adjudicate on the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee, which is also dismissed. 5. In the result,the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed

Income Tax Officer, Puri vs. Krushna Chandra Pujapanda, Puri

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

ITA 448/CTK/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.448/Ctk/2024 C.O. No.06/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23) Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Vs Krushna Chandra Pujapanda, Bhavan, Penthakata, Puri Matimandap Sahi, H.O.Puri Town, Puri. Pan No. : Abdpp 0879 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kumar Chatterjee, Ca : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 5 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 5 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 4.9.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi In Appeal No.Nfac/2021-22/10363554 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Cross Objection Is Filed By The Assessee In Appeal Filed By The Revenue In Ita No.448/Ctk/2024. 3. Shri Ashok Kumar Chatterjee, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar Chatterjee, CA

Section 54Section 54F

against the order dated 4.9.2024 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2021-22/10363554 for the assessment year 2022-23. 2. The cross objection is filed by the assessee in appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No.448/CTK/2024. 3. Shri Ashok Kumar Chatterjee, ld AR appeared ... assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that in the cross objection, the assessee has challenged the action of the revenue in filing the appeal against the order of ld CIT(A), where the assessee has been

DCIT(TDS)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Novartis Healthcare Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2768/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Dcit(Tds)-2(3) Novartis Healthcare Private 320, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill, Limited Mtnl Te Bldg. Peddar Road Vs. 7Th Floor, Inspire Bkc, G Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg Block, Bkc Main Road Mumbai-400 026. Bandra, Mumbai-400 051. Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 121/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year : 2020-21)

For Respondent: S/Shri Anish Thacker (CA)

Section 133ASection 192Section 194Section 194HSection 201

above, the addition made by Ld. AO is deleted. The Appeal of the Revenue is DISMISSED. C.O. No. 121/Mum/2025 The Respondent company filed a Cross Objection by raising following three grounds of appeal on the issue of applicability of section 194A of the Act on interest on delayed payments ... Mumbai in the case of Wokhardt Ltd. (ITA No. 2633/Mum2024 dated 5.8.2024 A.Y. 2015-16). 11. In view of above, the appellant succeeds in Cross Objection and appeal is allowed. 12. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of appellant company is allowed. Order pronounced

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4188/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer Vs. Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Room No.217, Cr Ltd., 130, First Floor, Building, D-Mall, Netaji Subhash New Delhi – 110002 Place, Pitampura, Saraswati Vihar, North West Delhi, Delhi - 110034 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcp9429N Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No.83/Del/2025 (Assessment Year:2015-16) Pankaj Enterprises Pvt. Vs. Ito, Ward 19(3) Ltd., 130, First Floor, Room No.217, Cr D-Mall, Netaji Subhash Building, Place, Pitampura, New Delhi – 110002 Saraswati Vihar, North West Delhi, Delhi - 110034 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcp9429N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Shilpi Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Krishna Kumar Ramawat, Sr

Section 13Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 282(1)

Hearing 01.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement 05.12.2025 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the order dated 09.08.2024 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority ... served on the assessee beyond the limitation we are inclined to sustain the legal ground No. 1 raised by the assessee and consequently, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. The assessment order is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, ordered. The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vs. Mahalaxmi Light House, Hapur

ITA 3514/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapurchungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

Section 148Section 148ASection 69

Amisha S. Gupt, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeal and Cross Objection are filed by the Revenue and the Assessee challenging the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC ... Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 28/06/2024, the Department preferred the present Appeal. The Assessee has also filed Cross Objection. The respective grounds of Appeal/Cross Objection of the parties as under:- 3 ITA Nos. 3514, & C.O No. 109/Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Light House “1. 1. That

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Hapur

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3513/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahalakshmi Light House, Income Tax 285, Avas Vikas Vihar, Room No. 201, First Floor, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, Pan: Aatfm3627N Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

Section 147Section 69C

Amisha S. Gupt, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 09/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned appeal and Cross Objections are filed by the Revenue and the Assessee against the ordersof Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC ... against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 28/06/2024, the department preferred the present Appeal. The Assessee has also filed Cross Objection challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 3 ITA No. 3513 & C.O No. 119 /Del/2024 DCIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Light House 4. The respective grounds of Appeal/C.O

ACIT-Circle-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Puneet Agarwal, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 338/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kanpur – 4 dated 09.04.2025 for Assessment Year 2025-16. The assessee, Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal also filed cross objections against the appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2015-16. 2. The Revenue has also filed appeals in the cases of Mayank Agarwal and Puneet Aggarwal ... Vishwambhar Dayal, against the order of ld. CIT (A), Kapur – 4 dated 09.04.2025 for AY 2015-16. Both the assessees have filed the cross objections against the appeals filed by the Revenue. 3. Since the issues are common and the appeals are connected, hence the same are heard together

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Sh. Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal, Agra

ITA 337/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kanpur - 4 dated 09.04.2025 for Assessment Year 2025-16. The assessee, Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal also filed cross objections against the appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2015-16. 2. The Revenue has also filed appeals in the cases of Mayank Agarwal and Puneet Aggarwal ... Vishwambhar Dayal, against the order of ld. CIT (A), Kapur - 4 dated 09.04.2025 for AY 2015-16. Both the assessees have filed the cross objections against the appeals filed by the Revenue. 3. Since the issues are common and the appeals are connected, hence the same are heard together

ACIT-Circel-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Mayank Agrawal, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 336/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal, Agra vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 330/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

Asha Choudhury, Imphal vs. Income Tax Ward 1 Imphal, Imphal

ITA 303/GTY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati04 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: the date of hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 20Section 250Section 69

consequently, the notice dated 27/07/2022 is clearly barred by limitation and on this ground, the assessment proceedings u/s.147 is hereby quashed. Accordingly, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed and all the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous. 10. In the result, appeal filed ... Revenue is dismissed as infructuous and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. 6. In the present case, it admits of no doubt that notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.07.2022 being clearly barred by limitation. In the case of the assessee the period of 6 years

Asha Choudhury, Imphal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Imphal, Imphal

ITA 302/GTY/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati04 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: the date of hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 20Section 250Section 69

DCIT CC 2(2) Kolkata, Kolkata vs. Akriti Sales Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

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

ITA 1779/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit Cc2(2) Kolkata Akriti Sales Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva 34 Indra Kumar Karnani Street, 110 Shanti Pally, Kolkata, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca2765B Co No. 70/Kol/2025 (Ita No. 1779/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit Cc2(2) Kolkata Akriti Sales Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva 34 Indra Kumar Karnani Street, 110 Shanti Pally, Kolkata, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 68

issues raise therein by holding that ₹1,35,40,535/- is income from business. Consequently, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced

Ammapalayam Basuvaptti Primary Agricultural Co Op Credit Society Limited, Erode vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1) Erode, Erode

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2706/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms.A. Vijayalakshmi, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R. Raghupathy, Addl.CIT

Section 270ASection 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

dismiss appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18. 11. The assessee has filed cross objections in support of order of the ld. CIT(A). Since, the appeals filed by the revenue has been dismissed, the cross objections filed by the assessee in support ... findings of the ld. CIT(A) ITA Nos.2705 & 2706/Chny/2025 (AY 2020-21) M/s. Ammapalayam Basuvaptti PACCS Ltd. :: 8 :: becomes infructuous and thus, cross objections filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13, 201415 & 2017-18 are dismissed. 12. In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years

Ammapalayam Basuvaptti Primary Agricultural Co Op Credit Society Limited, Erode vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1) Erode, Erode

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2705/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms.A. Vijayalakshmi, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R. Raghupathy, Addl.CIT

Section 270ASection 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Rajesh Kumar Kalra, Delhi

ITA 3607/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 3607 & Co No. 114/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar Kalra, Central Circle-6, S-241, Ground Floor, Greater Delhi-110055 Kailash, South Delhi, New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajpk8606M Assessee By : Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal & Assessee’S Cross Objection I.E. & Co No. 114/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Arises Against The Cit(A)-24, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024- 25/1073629429(1) Dated 24.02.2025, In Proceedings U/S 153C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT-DR

Section 153C

Date of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection i.e. and CO No. 114/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2013-14, arises against the CIT(A)-24, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024- 25/1073629429(1) dated ... detailed discussion quashing the impugned assessment. The Revenue fails in it’s instant appeal ITA No. 3607/Del/2025 therefore. 5. The assessee’s cross objection CO No. 114/Del/2025 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, this Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 3607/Del/2025 is dismissed and the assessee’s cross

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 521/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT

Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

Bhubaneswar-2/10287/2019-20, NFAC/2016-17/10418285, NFAC/2017- 18/10135149 & NFAC/2017-18/10087368 for the assessment years, 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19, respectively. 2. The assessee has filed cross objections in the respective assessment years in appeals filed by the revenue. 3. Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue ... under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, additional ground raised by the assessee stands allowed.” 7. It was the submission that the cross objections filed by the assessee are only in support of the orders of ld CIT(A). 8. We have considered the rival submissions

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 520/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT

Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 518/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT

Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A