← 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

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5538/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Shah, (SC, 2025), we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 on 18.07.2022 is barred by limitation and, therefore, the same is quashed. The Cross Objections taken by taken by the assesse are allowed. 8. Following the above decision, we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 dated

Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5537/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Shah, (SC, 2025), we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 on 18.07.2022 is barred by limitation and, therefore, the same is quashed. The Cross Objections taken by taken by the assesse are allowed. 8. Following the above decision, we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 dated

Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi vs. Pawan Goyal, Delhi

In the result, appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 5536/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anurag S. Daria, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Shah, (SC, 2025), we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 on 18.07.2022 is barred by limitation and, therefore, the same is quashed. The Cross Objections taken by taken by the assesse are allowed. 8. Following the above decision, we hold that the notice issued u/s 148 dated

DCIT, Delhi vs. Nm Industries Private Limited, New Delhi

ITA 4982/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. C.S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT, DR
Section 147Section 147BSection 148Section 68

4982/Del/2024 CO. 99 & 100/Del/2025 NM Industries (AY: 2013-14 & 2014-15) O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: These two appeals and Cross Objections filed by the Revenue and assessee respectively are directed against the common order passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi dated ... warrant interference. Hence, this appeal filed by the Revenue is found to be devoid of any merit and thus, dismissed. 6. The Cross Objection No. 99/Del/2025 preferred by the assessee is not pressed. Thus, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 7. In this case

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S N M Industries Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 4980/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. C.S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT, DR
Section 147Section 147BSection 148Section 68

4982/Del/2024 CO. 99 & 100/Del/2025 NM Industries (AY: 2013-14 & 2014-15) O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: These two appeals and Cross Objections filed by the Revenue and assessee respectively are directed against the common order passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi dated ... warrant interference. Hence, this appeal filed by the Revenue is found to be devoid of any merit and thus, dismissed. 6. The Cross Objection No. 99/Del/2025 preferred by the assessee is not pressed. Thus, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 7. In this case

ACIT, Circle- 9(1), New Delhi vs. Fis Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and CO of the assessee are partly allowed as above for statistical purposes

ITA 372/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Date of Pronouncement 25/08/2025 1 CO No.64/Del/2018 ORDER PER BENCH: Common grounds and facts arise in the above captioned appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection (‘CO’) of the assessee; therefore, the appeal and CO were heard together and are being disposed off by this common order. 2. The above

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Ravikumar Burugupalli, West Godavari

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 198/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 198/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Dy. Cit (International Taxation) V. Ravikumar Burugupalli Income Tax Office Proprietor Sasi Fuel Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Sasi School, Main Road Sankaramatam Road Velivenu Post Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 38/Viz/2025 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.198/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17)] Ravikumar Burugupalli V. Dy. Cit (International Taxation) Proprietor Sasi Fuel Income Tax Office Sasi School, Main Road Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Velivenu Post Sankaramatam Road Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt A. Aruna, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(c)

dated 13.01.2025 arising out of the order passed under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 30.03.2021. Cross objection is filed by the assessee in support of the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee ... dismissed. Page No. 6 C.O. No. 38/VIZ/2025 Ravikumar Burugupalli C.O. No. 38/VIZ/2025 10. With respect to grounds raised by the assessee’s in the Cross Objection filed in C.O.No.38/VIZ/2025, the Ld.AR submitted that the Cross objection is supportive to the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Since the grounds raised

Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Phoenix Flexibles Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross

ITA 669/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 251(1)(a)Section 68Section 69C

Page 2 of 6 O R D E R PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee are directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short “the CIT(A)”) dated 31.01.2025 for the Assessment ... proceedings under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The assessee has also filed a Cross Objection. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal and the ground taken by the assessee in the Cross Objection are as under

ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Makarpura Industrial Estate Co Operative Bank Ltd, Vadodara

ITA 1250/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 143(1)

Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee by Shri Samir Parikh, AR Revenue by Shri Sudhakar Verma, DR Date of Hearing 18.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.08.2025 ITA No.1250/Ahd/2025 & Cross Objection No.58/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Makarpura Industrial Estate Coop. Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT Page 2 of 5 O R D E R PER NARENDRA ... PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee is directed against the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of income Tax (A)-1, Ludhiana dated 20.03.2025 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2021-22, which in turn has arisen from the order issued

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Vijendra Surendra Exports Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 1880/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

alleged bogus purchases. Therefore, for the reasons as mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs, we allow the ground in assessee's cross objections in all the three years and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the additions as sustained by the Ld. CIT (A).” 22. In the light of the findings

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Vijendra Surendra Exports Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 1871/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

alleged bogus purchases. Therefore, for the reasons as mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs, we allow the ground in assessee's cross objections in all the three years and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the additions as sustained by the Ld. CIT (A).” 22. In the light of the findings

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Vijendra Surendra Exports Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 1870/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

alleged bogus purchases. Therefore, for the reasons as mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs, we allow the ground in assessee's cross objections in all the three years and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the additions as sustained by the Ld. CIT (A).” 22. In the light of the findings

ITO, Ward 47(1), Delhi vs. Pure Agri World, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 5379/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No. 5379/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Ito, Pure Agri World, 2618/19, 2Nd Floor, Ward 47(1), Vs. Delhi. Maruti Bhawan, Naya Bazar, Delhi. Pan No.Aaofp2516N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No.54/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 5379/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Pure Agri World, Ito, 2618/19, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Ward 47(1), Maruti Bhawan, Delhi. Naya Bazar, Delhi. Pan No.Aaofp2516N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 151A

बनाम ITO, PURE AGRI WORLD, 2618/19, 2nd Floor, Ward 47(1), Vs. Delhi. Maruti Bhawan, Naya Bazar, Delhi. PAN No.AAOFP2516N अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No.54/Del/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 5379/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम PURE AGRI WORLD, ITO, 2618/19, 2nd Floor, Vs. Ward ... षणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on ITA No.5379/Del/2024 & CO No.54/Del/2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal and Cross Objection are filed by the Revenue and Assessee respectively against the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT dated 18.11.2024 for the AY 2015-16. Revenue in its appeal

ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi vs. Vikram Electric Equipment P.Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 4651/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shir Mahavir Singh() Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

HIGHVISTA BUILDCON P. LTD. Earlier Known as VIKRAM ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT P. LTD. 346 A, 2nd Floor, Lado Sarai, New Delhi. PAN No.AABCV7648B प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent & Cross Objection No. 74/Del/2023 (In I.T.A No.4651/Del/2018) निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S HIGHVISTA BUILDCON P. LTD. Earlier Known as VIKRAM ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT ... सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date of hearing: 22.08.2025 उद्घोषणाकीतारीख / Pronouncement on 22.08.2025 1 I.T.A. No. 4651/Del/2018 & CO No.74/Del/2023 आदेश /ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal and cross objection are filed by the Revenue and Assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)-32, New Delhi dated

Income Tax Officer Ward -2 (1), Amritsar vs. Ms. Savita Bansal, Through Legal Heir Sh. Parveen Kumar Bansal, Amritsar

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 240/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 240/Asr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Income Tax Officer Smt. Savita Bansal Ward-2(1) बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Amritsar 143001 H.No. 272, Green Avenue Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No. 1/Amritsar/2024 (In Ita No. 240/Asr/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Savita Bansal Income Tax Officer बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Ward-2(1) H.No. 272, Green Avenue Amritsar 143001 Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016- 1. 17 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Amritsar 143001 H.No. 272, Green Avenue Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./PAN. ABMPB-3594-K (Assessee) / ACNPK-4131-D (LH) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No. 1/Amritsar/2024 (in ITA No. 240/ASR/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Savita Bansal Income Tax Officer बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen ... matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30-12-2018. The assessee has filed cross-objections against the revenue’s appeal wherein the assessee has raised pertinent legal grounds which read as under: - 1 That having regard to the facts and circumstances

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Kamlaprabha L/H of Late Shri Gopal Lal Ji Goswami, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

ITA 94/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-Sr.DR a
Section 144Section 153C

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur [ for short AO ]. Against that appeal of the revenue the assessee also preferred to file the cross objection. 2. Since the issue is involved in the Revenue’s appeal and cross objection of the assessee relates to the same assessment year we considered to dispose ... ground(s) of appeal at any time before on during the hearing of this appeal.” 4. On the other hand, the assessee has filed cross objection in CO No. 22/JPR/2025 against the revenue’s appeal, on the following grounds:- “1. The Id. CITA erred in not deciding that the impugned

Jewels Emporium A Legacy, Jaipur vs. ACIT, CC-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1215/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT,Sr.-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

appeal was filed by ld.AO before the Hon’ble ITAT, Jaipur bench and 15 Jewels Emporium A Legacy, jaipur. the assessee had preferred a cross objection, wherein vide order dated 19.10.2015, the matter was set aside to the file of the AO in view of the fact that in case

Sunshine Technobuild Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

Accordingly ground no. 1 raised by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 592/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153ASection 153C

wherein the assessee is seeking reasons recorded along with the materials that formed basis of reopening. It is noted that, assessee also sought for cross objection of the persons whose statements formed the basis for addition in the hands of the assessee for the year under consideration. Admittedly the assessing ... officer as well as the Ld.CIT(A) denied 9 ITA No. 592/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2011-12 Sunshine Technobuild Private Limited the cross objection which is in violation of Principle of natural justice as observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE reported

ACIT, Circle 25(1), Delhi vs. T&T Motors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee

ITA 2049/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Kumar Chaudhary, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 263Section 37

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi – 36 [“ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 22.09.2020 for AY 2014-15 and the assessee has filed cross objections against the impugned order dated 22.09.2020 for AY 2014-14. The assessee has also filed appeal against the order of Pr. CIT, Delhi-9 dated ... heard together and being disposed off by this common order. 3. Brief facts relating to the appeals preferred by the Revenue and assessee and cross objections filed by the assessee are, Ld. PCIT had initiated the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act after verification of assessment records and found that

T & T Motors Ltd., New Delhi vs. Prcit-09, New Delhi

Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee

ITA 2216/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Kumar Chaudhary, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 263Section 37

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi – 36 [“ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 22.09.2020 for AY 2014-15 and the assessee has filed cross objections against the impugned order dated 22.09.2020 for AY 2014-14. The assessee has also filed appeal against the order of Pr. CIT, Delhi-9 dated ... heard together and being disposed off by this common order. 3. Brief facts relating to the appeals preferred by the Revenue and assessee and cross objections filed by the assessee are, Ld. PCIT had initiated the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act after verification of assessment records and found that