“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

Avinash S Sadamate, ACIT, Circle 3 3 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Rashmi Infrastructure Developers Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the Revenue's appeal and Cross

ITA 6605/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal / Jay Bhansali, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, (CIT DR)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 801B(10)Section 801B(10)(c)

No.15/Mum/2025 Α.Υ. 2013-14 Rashmi Infrastructure Developers Limited आदेश / ORDER PER PRABHASH SHANKAR [A.M.] :- The present appeal preferred by the Revenue and Cross Objections of the assessee emanate from the appellate order dated 12.11.2024 as passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ... additions. However, the ld.CIT(A) in the impugned order allowed its appeal which is now being agitated before us by the Revenue with cross objection filed separately by the assessee. 4. The assessee is engaged in the business of Real estate as a builder who completed a Slum Rehabilitation project

ACIT-3, Lucknow vs. Harshit Garg, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 451/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Acit, Lucknow Vs. Harshit Garg, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57-Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow Pan: Aiopg3763A (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.25/Lkw/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Harshit Garg, Vs. Acit, Lucknow Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57- Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow Pan: Aiopg3763A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Akshay Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.07.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 17.06.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Ao

For Appellant: Sh. Akshay Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 68

that mandatory requirement of quoting the PAN number may be bypassed.” 2. Subsequent to the filing of the aforesaid appeal, the assessee filed a Cross Objection in which the following grounds of appeal were preferred, which reads as under:- “1. The Learned Assessing Officer, and the Commissioner of Income ... other than credit entry in books is bad in law.” 3. Subsequent to the case being taken up for hearing, the assessee withdrew the Cross Objection and accordingly the said Cross Objection is dismissed. 4. The facts of the case are that the assessee, who is the proprietor

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Madhani Securities Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 3846/MUM/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhandcit-14(1)(1) M/S. Kalpana Madhani R. No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Securities Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 11/1102, Shanti Tower, Shanti Mumbai-400 020 Path, Near Garodia Nagar, Mumbai-400 077 Pan: Aabck2968H

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 73

Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 11/1102, Shanti Tower, Shanti Mumbai-400 020 Path, Near Garodia Nagar, Mumbai-400 077 PAN: AABCK2968H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No. 162/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) M/s. Kalpana Madhani Vs. DCIT-14(1)(1) Securities Pvt. Ltd. R. No. 432, 4th floor, Aayakar 11/1102, Shanti Tower ... KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. By this common order, we proceed to decide the appeal filed by the revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 07.06.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred

Income Tax Officer Ward 10(1) Delhi, Delhi vs. Aruna Gupta, Delhi

ITA 687/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 687/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Vs Aruna Gupta, Ward-10(1), B-1/45, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110029 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakpg2642L Co No. 49/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Aruna Gupta, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-1/45, Safdarjung Enclave, Ward-10(1), New Delhi-110029 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aakpg2642L Assessee By: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.07.2025 Order This Revenue’S Appeal & Assessee’S Cross Objection Co No. 49/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1071333531(1) Dated 18.12.2024, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 01.07.2025 ORDER This Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection CO No. 49/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2017-18 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071333531(1) dated 18.12.2024, in proceedings ... aside.” 4. I adopt the above detailed reasoning mutatis mutandis to quash the impugned reopening itself in very terms. 5. The assessee’s cross objection CO No. 49/Del/2025 to this effect succeeds and the Revenue’s main appeal ITA No. 687/Del/2025 fails therefore. 6. All other pleadings on merits herein

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. Wheel Flexible Packaging, Dadra

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1063/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1063/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Wheel Flexible Packaging, Income-Tax, Vapi Circle, C-24/25, Zero Tax Industrial Estate, Fortune Square Ii, 7Th Vs. Dadra, Dadra & Nagar Haveli –396230 Floor, Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396 191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaafw 2971 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92B

Dadra, Dadra & Nagar Haveli –396230 Floor, Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396 191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAAFW 2971 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.30/SRT/2024 (a/o ITA No.1063/SRT/2024) Assessment Year: (2016-17) Wheel Flexible Packaging, Assistant Commissioner of C-24/25, Zero Tax Industrial Estate, Income-tax, Vapi Circle, Dadra, Dadra ... 01/05/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 30/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by the Revenue and Cross Objection (CO) thereto by assessee are emanate from the order passed under section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross-Objections

ITA 3192/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3188 To 3192/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 & Cross-Objection Nos.22 To 26/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The Acit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement V. : : : : Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Old No.16/5, New No.33/5, Rajamannar Street, Thyagaraya Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Actpv 0618 E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross- Objector) Mrs. Sheila Parthasarthy, Cit Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate 28.04.2025 30.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai (Hereinafter Referred To As `Ld.Cit(A) `) All Dated 17.10.2024 For The

Section 132Section 153ASection 15ASection 271D

SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.3188 to 3192/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 & Cross-Objection Nos.22 to 26/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 The ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी ... Ld.CIT(A) `) all dated 17.10.2024 for the Assessment Years (hereinafter in short `AY') 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 and Cross-Objections (CO) filed by the assessee for ITA Nos.3188 - 3192/Chny/2024 & CO Nos.22 - 26/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 to 2020-21) Kasthoori Raja Dhanush

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

ITA 3190/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT

Section 132Section 15A

JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.3188 to 3192/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 & Cross-Objection Nos.22 to 26/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 v. The ACIT, Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Central ... Ld.CIT(A) ‘) all dated 17.10.2024 for the Assessment Years (hereinafter in short ‘AY’) 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 and Cross-Objections (CO) filed by the assessee for ITA Nos.3188 - - 3192/Chny/2024 & CO Nos.22 CO Nos.22 - 26/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015 2015-16 to 2020-21) Kasthoori Raja Dhanush

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

ITA 3189/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT

Section 132Section 15A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Kasthoori Raja Dhanush, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and Cross

ITA 3188/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Sheila Parthasarthy, CIT

Section 132Section 15A

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bengaluru, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore

ITA 2348/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 250

assessment year 2020-21 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). The assessee has also filed cross objections against the said appeals of the revenue. Since the issues in all these appeals & COs are common, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed ... submitted that after receiving the appeal papers filed by the Department, they consulted a CA to represent the matter who advised for filing the cross objections. However, it took some time to collate the information related to the cross objections. On going through the reasons cited by Revenue as well

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bengaluru

ITA 2347/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.R

Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessment year 2020-21 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "The Act"). The assessee has also filed cross objections against the said appeals of the revenue. Since the issues in all these appeals & COs are common, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed ... Form 36 and Grounds of appeal filed by the assessing officer before the Hon'ble Tribunal were received by the appellant on 10.12.2024. The cross objections ought to have been filed on or before 09.01.2025. However, the same is being filed now with a delay of 11 days. In this

Parshwa Investment, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1429/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Parshwa Investment Deputy Commissioner Of B-602, Klassic Gold Hotel, Off Cg Income Tax, Central Circle-7(1) Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, Vs. Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Gujrat- 380009 Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe, M.K.Road, Mumbai, Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aatfp 4387 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

legal sanction. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings, and the resultant additions made therein, are liable to be quashed in their entirety. Accordingly, assessee's groundsin Cross-Objection are allowed, and the reassessment proceedings held to be void ab initio. 9. Considering the above, the legal issue raised by the assessee ... cross objection is allowed. Consequently, the appeal of the revenue on merit is kept open and dismissed.” 5.6. Further, the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Sejal Jewellery v. Union of India (Writ Petition No. 3057 of 2019) held in no uncertain terms that where the Revenue proceeds against

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 5000/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Date of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee and by the Revenue and the Cross-Objections (C.Os) are filed by the assessee in case of captioned assessee's for various Assessment years. Since the issues involved in all the cross appeals ... totally unrelated and irrelevant to the respondent. 5. The respondent craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of cross objections either before or during the course of hearing of the same." 9. Since all the grounds taken by the Revenue are related to the deletion

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Animate Infrastructure Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 4850/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 ITA Nos. 4850/Del/2024 & C.O.Nos.14 & 20/Del/2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeal is filed by the Revenue and the Cross- Objections (C.O.) are filed by the assessee in case of captioned assessee for Assessment year 2021-22. Since the issues involved in the appeal filed ... revenue and cross objection raised by the assessee in its C.O. are common therefore, the appeal of the revenue and both the C.O.’s are taken together and decided through a common order. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company

ACIT, Delhi vs. Grand Estate LLP, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4740/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Date of hearing: | 23.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement: | 30.06.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals are filed by the Revenue and the Cross- Objections (C.O.) are filed by the assessee in case of captioned assessee for various Assessment years. Since the issues involved in all the appeals filed ... revenue and cross objections raised by the assessee in all the C.O.'s are common therefore, all the appeals of the revenue and all the C.O.'s of the assessee are taken together and decided through a common order. First we take revenue's appeal in ITA No. 4729/Del/2024

ACIT, Dlehi vs. Grand Estates LLP, Delhi

ITA 4737/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Date of hearing: 23.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals are filed by the Revenue and the Cross- Objections (C.O.) are filed by the assessee in case of captioned assessee for various Assessment years. Since the issues involved in all the appeals filed ... revenue and cross objections raised by the assessee in all the C.O.’s are common therefore, all the appeals of the revenue and all the C.O.’s of the assessee are taken together and decided through a common order. First we take revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 4729/Del/2024

ACIT, Delhi vs. Grand Estates LLP, Delhi

ITA 4729/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatax Inida Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4635/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Date of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee and by the Revenue and the Cross-Objections (C.Os) are filed by the assessee in case of captioned assessee’s for various Assessment years. Since the issues involved in all the cross appeals ... Officer is totally unrelated and irrelevant to the respondent. The respondent craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of cross objections either before or during the course of hearing of the same.” 9. Since all the grounds taken by the Revenue are related

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Bajaj Rubber Company Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross

ITA 2631/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshdcit, Vs. Bajaj Rubber Company Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-15, C-47, Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, Mayapuri, Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccb0949Gf Co 74/Del/2024 (In Ita No. 2631/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bajaj Rubber Company Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, C-47, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Central Circle-15, Phase-Ii, Mayapuri, New Delhi Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccb0949Gf Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2025

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

made applicable only from AY 2018-19 onwards and not earlier. With these observations, grounds raised by the revenue are hereby dismissed. The cross objection filed by the assessee is only supportive of 5. order of ld CIT(A). In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 2060/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal