← 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

Quetzal Buildtech Private Limited, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Haryana

ITA 6409/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 234BSection 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6409/Del/2025 Assessment

ACIT Central Circle-1 Raipur, Raipur vs. Maruti Clean Coal and Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 558/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. /It(Ss)A No.19/Rpr/2025 Co No.19/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Maruti Clean Coal & Power Limited 8Th Floor, Cbd Complex, Sector-21, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Raipur-492 018 Pan: Aadcm4810C ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Salil Kapoor &For Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR

Hearing : 06.02.2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronouncement : 16.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH: The captioned appeals preferred by the Revenue and corresponding cross-objections preferred by the assessee emanates from the respective orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals), Raipur-3, dated 12.02.2025 & 17.07.2025 for the assessment years ... No.19/RPR/2025 for A.Y.2014-15 is dismissed. CO No.19/RPR/2025 A.Y.2014-15 20. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the cross objection filed by the assessee is only supportive of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals). In view thereof since the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-3, New Delhi

ITA 6365/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-3, New Delhi

ITA 6358/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 480/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 479/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 1156/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charu Shekhar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 1154/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.76/Del/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No.499/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Charu Shekhar Gupta, Vs. Acit, 203, Ashadeep Apartments, Central Circle-3, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Charu Shekhar Gupta, Central Circle-3, 203, Ashadeep Apartment, New Delhi 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaapg6913C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

clinching findings to the very effect. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 1154 & 1156/Del/2017 fail in very terms. The assessee’s cross objection C.O. No.76/Del/2017 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 6. To sum up, these assessee four appeals ITA Nos.479 & 480/Del/2017 and ITA Nos.6358 & 6365/Del/2019 are allowed for statistical ... purposes. The Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos.1154 & 1156/Del/2017 and assessee’s cross objection C.O. No. 76/Del/2017 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in preceding terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th February, 2026 (NAVEEN CHANDRA

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Kakinada vs. Sudha Agro Oil and Chemical Industries Limited, G.Ragampeta

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 518/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 148Section 250

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”], for the A.Y. 2015-16. Cross objection is filed by the assessee which is in support of the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 2. Since the appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross ... hence the addition made under section 68 of the Act should be confirmed. 8. On the other hand, assessee has filed the cross objection supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] of the assessee has filed detailed paper book and argued that

ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Ramesh Babu Segu, Hyderabad

ITA 1277/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1277/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2017-18) Acit, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Vs. Ramesh Babu Segu, Hyderabad. Pan: Amrps2069N (Respondent) C.O. No.03/Hyd/2025 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1277/Hyd/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2017-18) Ramesh Babu Segu, Hyderabad. Pan: Amrps2069N (Appellant) Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: Shri K A Sai Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad ("Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 11/10/2024 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2017-18. The Assessee Has Also Raised The Cross Objection For The A.Y.2017-

For Appellant: Shri K A Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 65BSection 69C

Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad ("Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 11/10/2024 for the Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2017-18. The assessee has also raised the Cross Objection for the A.Y.2017- ITA No.1277/Hyd/2024 & C.O. No.3/Hyd/2025 Ramesh Babu Segu 18. Since the issues raised in the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's Cross

Asst. Director of It (Exemp)-II, Hyderabad vs. Action for Welfare and Awakening in Rural Environment (Aware), Hyderabad

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 709/HYD/2012[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2026AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Shantivanam, Nagarjuna Sagar Road, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaata2338R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.138/Hyd/2012 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.709/Hyd/2012) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:1995-96) Asst. Director Of Income Tax Vs. Action For Welfare & (Exemptions)-Ii, Awakening In Rural Hyderabad. Environment (Aware), Pragati Bhavan, D.No.5-9- 24/78, Lake Hill Road, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad- 500463. Pan: Aaata2338R (Respondent/Cross Objector) (Appellant In Appeal) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 143(3)Section 147

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Guntur (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 23/06/2011 for the Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 1995-96. The assessee has also raised Cross Objection for the A.Y. 1995-96. As the Revenue’s appeal and the Cross Objection are pertaining to the same assessee and the issues raised ... both the Revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s Cross Objection are interwoven, therefore, for the sake of convenience and brevity, they were heard together and are being disposed of vide a consolidated order. Firstly, we shall take up the appeal filed by the Revenue. ITA No.709/Hyd/2012(Revenue’s Appeal

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Dnj Creation LLP, Mumbai

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue are dismissed

ITA 4329/MUM/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 92C

Date of pronouncement 13.02.2026 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by revenue and cross-objection therein by assessee are directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-56, Mumbai dated 11.04.2025for A.Y. 2017-18. The revenue has raised ... restricted to the amount of 10AA deduction claimed. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/or delete any of the grounds of cross objection before or during the course of appeal.” 3. Perusal of record shows that there is delay of about 50 days in filing cross- objection

DCIT, Delhi vs. Aster Tradelinks Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6254/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

Section 147Section 153(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

DCIT Vs Aster Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. Delhi A-3/3, Khajuri Chowk Pusta Road Bhajanpura New Delhi- 110055 Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAFCA6048L Cross Objection No. 4/DEL/2026; Assessment Year: 2016-17 Aster Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT A-3/3, Khajuri Chowk Pusta Delhi Road Bhajanpura New Delhi ... Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 13.02.2026 ORDER PER RENU JAUHRI : The above captioned appeal and cross-objection are preferred by the revenue and the assessee respectively. 1 | P a g e ITA No. 6254 Aster Tradelinks Pvt Ltd & CO- 4/D/2026

Income Tax Officer, C R Building vs. Aggarwal Alloy Steels Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed and revenue’s appeal stand dismissed

ITA 5074/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanito, Vs. Aggarwal Alloy Steels Room No. 199F, Pvt Ltd., 1St Floor, C.R. Building, 204, 2Nd Floor, Abhinash I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 2 Mansio, Main Joshi Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-5 (Pan: Aadca6884C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149

BUILDING, 204, 2ND FLOOR, ABHINASH I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI – 2 MANSIO, MAIN JOSHI ROAD, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI-5 (PAN: AADCA6884C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) And CROSS OBJECTION No. 3/DEL/2026 (AYR 2013-14) (IN ITA NO. 5074/DEL/2025) AGGARWAL ALLOY STEELS VS. ITO, PVT LTD., ROOM NO. 199F, 204, 2ND FLOOR, ABHINASH ... Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.2.2026 Date of Pronouncement 12.2.2026 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the Assessee, both are arising out of the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2012-13/10280584 dated 7.04.2025. Since

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Bansal Insulation Products Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5046/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanito, Vs. Bansal Insulation Products Room No. 380, C.R. Building, Pvt Ltd., New Delhi – 110 002 C-54/3, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, Delhi – 110 020 (Pan: Aaacb5035F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisa Maity, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

assessee mentioned that for the same assessment year i.e. AY 2013-14, Department has filed ITA No. 2892/Del/2024 and assessee has also filed Cross Objection No. 79/Del/2024, which have already been disposed of by the Tribunal’s common order dated 30.9.2025. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that this

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4913/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

Hearing : 10.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12.02.2026 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the Revenue and the and cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Mumbai (‘ld. ITA Nos.4913 & 4869/Mum/2025 CO Nos.259 & 258/M/2025 M/s. Bank ... delay is condoned. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal and the assessee has raised the following grounds in its cross objection: Grounds raised by the Revenue: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in holding reopening

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4869/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

Hearing : 10.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12.02.2026 O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the Revenue and the and cross objections by the assessee, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Mumbai (‘ld. ITA Nos.4913 & 4869/Mum/2025 CO Nos.259 & 258/M/2025 M/s. Bank ... delay is condoned. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal and the assessee has raised the following grounds in its cross objection: Grounds raised by the Revenue: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in holding reopening

ITO, Ward- 2(3)(4), Hapur vs. Shiva and Shiva, Hapur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s cross objection stand dismissed

ITA 1945/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahayito, Ward 2(3)(4), Vs. Shiva & Shiva Hapur Near Sri Ram Mandir, 3-A, Surya Vihar, L.N. School Marg, Near Ambedkar Chowk, Garh Road, Hapur, Up Hapur (Pan: Adxfs1969A) (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 101/Del/2025 (Ita No. 1945/Del/2025) (Ay 2020-21) Shiva & Shiva Vs. Ito, Ward 2(3)(4), Near Sri Ram Mandir, Hapur, Up L.N. School Marg, Garh Road, Hapur (Pan: Adxfs1969A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr. Assessee By : Sh. Ayaan Singh, Adv.

For Appellant: Sh. Ayaan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

Ayaan Singh, Adv. Date of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.2.2026 ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: The appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection by the Assessee are directed against the order passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 30.01.2025 for A.Y. 2020-21.Since appeal ... Cross Objection both are inter-connected, hence, the same were heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. First we deal with Revenue’s appeal No. 1945/Del/2025, wherein, the solitary ground of appeal raised reads as under:- “That on the facts and circumstances

ACIT, C 2(1)(1), Agra vs. Sunil Kumar Joshan, Agra

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 494/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhacit, Vs. Sunil Kumar Joshan, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Circle-2(1)(1), Agra Km Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P Co 07/Agr/2025 (In Ita No.494/Agr/2025) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sunil Kumar Joshan, Vs. Acit, Foot On Shoes, 7Th Km Circle-2(1)(1), Stone, Agra Delhi Bye Agra Pass Road, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpj4015P

For Appellant: Shri Sahib P. Satsangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

NFAC while granting the relief, on which I do not find any infirmity. Hence, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed. 11. The Cross Objections preferred by the assessee are only supportive of the order of the learned NFAC. 12. In the result, the appeal of the revenue ... dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced in the open court on 11/02/2026. - - (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 11/02/2026 A K Keot

Income Tax Officer- 22(1)(6), Mumbai vs. Arvind Premchand Jain, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2878/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Date of Hearing 12.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee challenging the order dt. 06.03.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National ... Jain, Mumbai. Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment years 2015-16. 2. Since all the issues involved in the present appeal and cross objection are common and identical and belongs to one assessee therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed. Firstly