← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Dehradun vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Limited, Haryana

In the result, the Cross Objection No

ITA 142/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 44B

Revenue in ITA Nos. 172/DDN/2024, I.T.A. No. 143/DDN/2024 and I.T.A. No. 142/DDN/2024. 8. Since we have dismissed the Appeals filed by the Revenue, the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee have become in-fructuous. 9. In the result, the Cross Objection No. 1/DDN/2025 filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Order

ITO, Ward - 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shree Gayatri Cottex Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 688/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Bavishi, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 57

46/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Shree Gayatri Cottex Engineers Pvt. Ltd. & Shree Gayatri Cottex Engineers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO Asst. Year –2021-22 - 2– 2. The cross objection filed by the assessee is delayed by 2 days. The assessee has filed a condonation application explaining the reason for delay. It is explained ... obtaining professional advice on the legality and the complexity of the issue involved. Considering the explanation of the assessee the delay in filing the cross objection is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 declaring

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tmf Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 2983/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhrideputy Commissioner Of Vs Tmf Holdings Limited 14, 4Th Floor, Sir H C Dinshaw Income Tax, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai Building, 16, Horniman Circle, Fort, Room No.535, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Mumbai-400 001 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Pan: Aacct4644A 400 020 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

18/07/2025 2 ITA 2983/Mum /2025 CO 132/Mum/2025 TMF Limited O R D E R Per Anikesh Banerjee (JM): instant appeal of the revenue and cross objection by the assesse were filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter called, ‘Ld. CIT(A)] passed under section ... merit was not adjudicated by the Ld.CIT(A). Being aggrieved, the revenue filed an appeal by challenging the legal ground and the assesse filed Cross Objection by challenging the merit of the case. 4. The Ld.DR argued and filed a written submission, which is kept on record. The relevant part

DCIT (It)-1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Avana Global Fzco, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2214/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

For Respondent: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Hardik

said issues become academic. 6. The Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. C.O. No. 103/mum/2025 7. As the Department’s appeal is dismissed, the Cross objection of respondent becomes academic and hence dismissed. 8. The facts in this appeal are pari materia with the appeal of A.Y. 2018-19. In view ... same, Department’s appeal is dismissed. C.O. No. 104/Mum/2025. 9. As the Department’s appeal is dismissed, the Cross objection of respondent becomes academic and hence dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18/07/2025. (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 8 Avana Global FZCO Copy of the Order forwarded

Ankur Jain, ACIT(OSD), Range -10, ITO C.R Building vs. Goodluck Carbon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3929/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 14Section 14(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 178Section 7

Date of hearing 26.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 18.07.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This Revenue’s appeal as well as assessee’s cross objections for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of ITA No.3929/Del/ 2023 & C.O. No. 39/Del/2024 Income Tax (Appeals) /National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short ... delve with the relevant factual matrix at length so far as the Revenue’s instant main appeal as well as the assessee’s cross-objection herein, are concerned. This is for the precise reason that the assessee’s financial creditor, namely, Canara Bank has already filed its case

A.C.I.T Circle-2(1), Rajkot vs. Sanskar Developers, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas cross objection (CO ) filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 242/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 242/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2015-16) Assisstant Commissioner Of Income- Sanskar Developers Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajkot, Room No. 311, Shop No. 1, Shri Raj Complex, 1- Vs. 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Madhav Park, B/H. Vijay Hostel, Course Road, Rajkot – 360001 150Ft Ring Road, Rajkot – 360004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ackfs 2310 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rashmin Vakariya, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 250

तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 17/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. A. L. Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16, are directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi/Learned ... aside and that of the assessing officer be restored to the above extent.” 3. The assessee has raised following ground in its cross objection: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing ground of appeal relating to initiation of action u/ 148 of the Act.” 4. Revenue has raised

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Multiplex Vyapaar Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 2488/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat, Kolkata Were Collected & Prepared. 06.12.2024 2Nd Appeal Was Filed.

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

assessee on 08.01.2025. 3. That the assessee had received Intimation dated 13.12.2024 on 08.01.2025. The assessee thereafter considered filing of Form No.36A relating to Cross Objection which was filed on 28.03.2025. 4. That upon receipt of Intimation about filing of the appeal by the Department against the Order ... staff of the assessee looking after the accounts & taxation matter expressed his opinion to file Cross Objection. 5. That after few days when consultation was made with the counsel Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, it came to the knowledge that there was time of 30 days only for submission of Cross

Income Tax Officer, Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara vs. Prahallad Prusty, Kendrapara

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

ITA 274/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.274/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Ito Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara Vs Prahallad Prusty, At-Kasoti, Pandiri, Duhuria, Kendrapara-754250 Pan No. : Ahdpp 6304 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.07/Ctk/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.274/Ctk/2025) (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Prahallad Prusty, Vs Ito Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara At-Kasoti, Pandiri, Duhuria, Kendrapara-754250 Pan No. : Ahdpp 6304 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nishanth Rao B, Sr.DR

Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara Vs Prahallad Prusty, At-Kasoti, Pandiri, Duhuria, Kendrapara-754250 PAN No. : AHDPP 6304 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. AND Cross Objection No.07/CTK/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.274/CTK/2025) (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Prahallad Prusty, Vs ITO Kendrapara Ward, Kendrapara At-Kasoti, Pandiri, Duhuria, Kendrapara ... National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 06.03.2025, for the assessment year 2017-2018. The assessee has also filed Cross Objection supporting to the order passed by the ld.CIT(A). 2. It was submitted by the ld Sr. DR that in the course of assessment two additions have been made

Southern Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Tiruchirapalli vs. DCIT, Cirlce-1(1), Trichy

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2478/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

case of Jafari Momin Vikas Co-op Credit Society Ltd. v. ITO in I.T.A. No. 1491/Ahd/2012 for assessment year 2009-10, deciding the Cross Objection filed along with appeal [C.O. No. 138/Ahd/2012] in favour of the assessee and by following the decision of the Kolkata Benches of the Tribunal, wherein

ACIT 531, Mumbai vs. Teleperformance Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 1484/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 250Section 263

Misra, CIT DR Date of hearing : 09/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These are five appeals and a cross objection. 4 appeals and the cross objections are filed by the assessee and one appeal is filed by the revenue. ITA Nos. 976 & 977/Mum/2021 ... been quashed by us, the consequential OGE and all related proceedings lose their legal substratum. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee and the cross-objection are allowed, and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 12. In the result, ITA No.976 & 977/Mum/2021 are allowed; ITA Nos 1451 & 1452/Mum/2024

Teleperformance Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Additional-Joint-Deputy-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 1452/MUM/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 250Section 263

Misra, CIT DR Date of hearing : 09/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These are five appeals and a cross objection. 4 appeals and the cross objections are filed by the assessee and one appeal is filed by the revenue. ITA Nos. 976 & 977/Mum/2021 ... been quashed by us, the consequential OGE and all related proceedings lose their legal substratum. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee and the cross-objection are allowed, and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 12. In the result, ITA No.976 & 977/Mum/2021 are allowed; ITA Nos 1451 & 1452/Mum/2024

Teleperformance Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Additional-Joint-Deputy-Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Ncome Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 1451/MUM/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 250Section 263

Misra, CIT DR Date of hearing : 09/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These are five appeals and a cross objection. 4 appeals and the cross objections are filed by the assessee and one appeal is filed by the revenue. ITA Nos. 976 & 977/Mum/2021 ... been quashed by us, the consequential OGE and all related proceedings lose their legal substratum. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee and the cross-objection are allowed, and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 12. In the result, ITA No.976 & 977/Mum/2021 are allowed; ITA Nos 1451 & 1452/Mum/2024

Teleperformance Global Services P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT -5, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 977/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 250Section 263

Misra, CIT DR Date of hearing : 09/07/2025 Date of pronouncement : 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These are five appeals and a cross objection. 4 appeals and the cross objections are filed by the assessee and one appeal is filed by the revenue. ITA Nos. 976 & 977/Mum/2021 ... been quashed by us, the consequential OGE and all related proceedings lose their legal substratum. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee and the cross-objection are allowed, and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 12. In the result, ITA No.976 & 977/Mum/2021 are allowed; ITA Nos 1451 & 1452/Mum/2024

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Akash Deep Sethi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and at the same time, the cross objections filed by the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 4973/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanincome Tax Officer, Vs. Akash Deep Sethi, Delhi. B-236, Derawal Nagar, Model Town, Delhi – 110 009. (Pan : Abyps8933P) Co No.26/Del/2025 (In Ita No.4973/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Akash Deep Sethi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-236, Derawal Nagar, Delhi. Model Town, Delhi – 110 009. (Pan : Abyps8933P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Shri Aman Garg, Ca Ms. Kirti, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2025 Date Of Order : 16.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

NFAC), Delhi 2 CO No.26/Del/2025 [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 27.06.2024 for Assessment Year 2021-22. The assessee has also filed cross objections against the aforesaid order of the ld. CIT (A). 2. Brief facts of the case are, assessee filed its return of income ... hence the addition made should come to Rs. 31,68,,277/-.” 5. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us and assessee has filed cross objections in support of the findings of the ld. CIT (A), raising following grounds of appeal :- “Revenue’s Appeal 1. On the facts and circumstances

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-03, Delhi vs. Haryana Constructions Pvt Ltd, Gurugram

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

ITA 2755/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit, Vs. Haryana Constructions Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-03, 14 Marla, Plot No. 7P, Sector-47, New Delhi Urban Estate, Ue 029, Gurugram, Haryana 122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacch1215R Co 43/Del/2024 (In Ita No. 2755/Del/2023) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Haryana Constructions Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 14 Marla, Plot No. 7P, Sector-47, Central Circle-03, Urban Estate, Ue 029, New Delhi Gurugram, Haryana 122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacch1215R Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv Shri Parth Singhal, Adv Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sita Shrivastava, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 21/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sita Shrivastava, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 153D

pronouncement 16/07/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No.2755/Del/2023 and Cross Objection filed by the assessee in CO No. 43/Del/2024 for AY 2017-18, arise out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ... DCIT, Central Circle-3, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in its cross objection:- “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23. New Delhi has grossly erred both in law and on facts in upholding

DCIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Citiland Commercial Credits Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and Cross-Objection by assessee are dismissed

ITA 346/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Citiland Commercial Income Tax, Circle- 4(2), Credits Ltd., 38 Dda New Delhi Commercial Complex, Kailash Colony Extension, Zamrudpur, New Delhi Pin: 1100 48 Pan No. Aaacc0251A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Arun Kishore & Suraj SumanFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

pronouncement: 16.07.2025 ITA No.346/Del/2021 & CO No. 94/Del/2023 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by Revenue and Cross Objection by assessee are against order dated 24.07.2020 of Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as “the Ld. CIT(A)”) under ... appellant/assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was allowed, vide order dated 24.07.2020. 4. Being aggrieved, appellant/revenue preferred present appeal and assessee filed cross-objection. The grounds raised by the Department of Revenue are as under: “1. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, whether

Income Tax Officer, Morbi vs. Pravinbhai Shivlalbhai Ghodasara, Morbi

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

ITA 935/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.935/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Income-Tax Officer Ward-1, Vs. Pravinbhai Shivlalbhai Aayakar Vibhag, J K Chamber, Nh Ghodasara 8A, At- Lalpar, Raj Bank Street, Morbi - 363642 Kalika Plot, Morbi - 363642 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Askpg8977A (Assessee) (Respondent) Co No.12/Rjt/2025 (A/O Ita No.935/Rjt/2024) Assessment Year: (2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 69

12/Rjt/25 ITO Ward-1 vs. Prabinbhai आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjunlal Saini AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16, are directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal ... partly deleted the addition made by the assessing officer, therefore, the revenue is in appeal before us and assessee also is in cross objection before us, in respect of addition sustained by the learned CIT(A). 6. Learned DR for the Revenue submitted that Assessing officer made addition in respect

ITO Ward-4(1), Gurgaon vs. Sandeep Sandha, Gurgaon

ITA 1195/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. Samyak Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 246ASection 260ASection 36(1)(va)

Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: 1. This Revenue's appeal ITA No. 1195/Del/2022 and assessee's cross objection CO No. 135/Del/2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi's DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1036498890(1) dated

Pramod Kumar Choudhary, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

deserve to be set-aside. In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In the result, cross objection of the assessee is allowed.” Smt. Gyatri Sharma Vs. ITO, Ward-Bundi ITA No. 461/JP/2018, Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench vide order dated

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Mahak Industries Private Limited, Delhi

In the result the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 661/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 09/07/2025 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal and the Cross Objections (CO) are filed by the Revenue and assessee respectively, against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ... that certain directions to recalculate the disallowance. 5. Against this order, the Revenue is in appeal before us and assessee has filed the Cross Objection. The Revenue has taken following grounds of appeal: C.O.87/Del/2024 ITO vs. Mahak Industries Pvt. Ltd. 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in facts