← 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

DDIT(Int.Tax.)1(1), Mumbai vs. The Bank of Tokyo- Mitsubishi Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 7324/MUM/2002[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2025AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 1997-98 Vs. The The Bank Of Tokyo- Additional Mitsubishi Ltd., Commissioner Of Income Price Waterhouse & Co., 20A Tax, Special Range-3, Park Street, Suite No. 9, Calcutta Calcutta-700016 Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 1999-2000 The Bank Of Tokyo- Vs. The Assistant Director Of Mitsubishi Ltd., Income Tax, International 5Th Floor, Worldmark 2, Taxation, Asset 8, Aerocity, Kolkata New Delhi-110037 Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Dy. Dit(It)-1(1), Vs. The Bank Of Tokyo- Mumbai Mitsubishi Ltd., 5Th Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset 8, Aerocity, New Delhi-110037 Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Nishant Thakkar, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.03.2025

Section 143(3)

detailed analysis would apply mutatis mutandis herein as well. 8. We accordingly decline both the Revenue’s instant appeal as well as assessee’s cross objection(s) thereby concluding that ITAT, Delhi Benches do not have territorial jurisdiction to decide the same, subject to a rider that the department

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Lokhandwala Kataria Construction (Pvt) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3879/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Respondent: Mr. Dharmesh Shah &
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

Commissioner of Income passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) tax (Appeals) – 50, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross-objection has Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross been filed ... these appeals As the common grounds have been raised in these appeals As the common grounds have been raised in these appeals and cross objections, and cross objections, therefore, same were heard together and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Lokhandwala Kataria Construction (Pvt) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3878/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Respondent: Mr. Dharmesh Shah &
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

Commissioner of Income passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) tax (Appeals) – 50, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross-objection has Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], whereas, the cross been filed ... these appeals As the common grounds have been raised in these appeals As the common grounds have been raised in these appeals and cross objections, and cross objections, therefore, same were heard together and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham-Kutch vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham-Kutch

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

Bench, This is bunch of nine appeals, out of that five appeals filed by the Revenue and four Cross objections filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14, all these appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are directed against ... Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Since, these five appeals filed by the Revenue and four cross objections of assessee, pertain to the same assessee and identical and common issues are involved, therefore, these appeals of revenue and cross objections of assessee, have been clubbed

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 236/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

Bench, This is bunch of nine appeals, out of that five appeals filed by the Revenue and four Cross objections filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14, all these appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are directed against ... Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Since, these five appeals filed by the Revenue and four cross objections of assessee, pertain to the same assessee and identical and common issues are involved, therefore, these appeals of revenue and cross objections of assessee, have been clubbed

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 235/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

Bench, This is bunch of nine appeals, out of that five appeals filed by the Revenue and four Cross objections filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14, all these appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are directed against ... Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Since, these five appeals filed by the Revenue and four cross objections of assessee, pertain to the same assessee and identical and common issues are involved, therefore, these appeals of revenue and cross objections of assessee, have been clubbed

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

Bench, This is bunch of nine appeals, out of that five appeals filed by the Revenue and four Cross objections filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14, all these appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are directed against ... Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Since, these five appeals filed by the Revenue and four cross objections of assessee, pertain to the same assessee and identical and common issues are involved, therefore, these appeals of revenue and cross objections of assessee, have been clubbed

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 233/RJT/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

Bench, This is bunch of nine appeals, out of that five appeals filed by the Revenue and four Cross objections filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14, all these appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee, are directed against ... Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Since, these five appeals filed by the Revenue and four cross objections of assessee, pertain to the same assessee and identical and common issues are involved, therefore, these appeals of revenue and cross objections of assessee, have been clubbed

ITO WD - 2(1), Kolkata vs. Unicorn Housing (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objection by the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 2190/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2190/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Income Tax Officer,……………………..………Appellant Ward-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- Unicorn Housing Private Limited,………....Respondent 2A, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, 2Nd Floor, Room No. 4 & 4A, Kolkata-700013 [Pan:Aaacu9328G] & C.O. No. 48/Kol/2024 (In Ita No. 2190/Kol/2024) Assessment Year: 2011-2012

Revenue is dismissed as not pressed. 2. As a result of dismissal of the appeal of the Revenue being not pressed, the Cross Objection bearing C.O. No. 48/KOL/2024 filed by the assessee has become infructuous. Accordingly, this Cross Objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed. 3. In the result ... appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objection by the assessee both are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17/03/2025. (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 17th day of March, 2025 2 & C.O. No. 48/KOL/2024 (in ITA 2190/KOL/2024) (AY 2011-2012) Unicorn Housing Private

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 12(1), Kolkata vs. Vasa Commercial Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the cross objection of the assessee as well as

ITA 1675/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 10(38)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

appeal of the Revenue by upholding the order of Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 06. Since, the assessee did not press the cross objection filed by the assessee and therefore, same is dismissed as not pressed. 07. In the result, both the cross objection of the assessee as well

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata vs. Sawansukha Jewellers Private Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1615/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Vs. Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700017, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcs2477R Co No. 32/Kol/2024 (Airing Out Of The Ita No. 1615/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2018-19) Sawansukhajewellers Acit, Circle-7(1), Private Limited 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 4Th Floor, 9, Camac Street, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700017, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148

1615/KOL/2024 & CO 32/KOL/2024 SawansukhaJewellers Private Limited; A.Y. 2018-19 02. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee in cross objection pressed ground no.2, which is against the part confirmation of addition to the tune of ₹26,40,668/- being 12% of the total bogus purchases ... with regard to sustaining of addition to the tune of 12% and direct the ld. AO to delete the addition. Accordingly, the cross objection raised in ground no.2 is allowed. ITA No. 1615/KOL/2024 & CO 32/KOL/2024 SawansukhaJewellers Private Limited; A.Y. 2018-19 08. Since, we have already allowed the cross objection

Vodafone India Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 8 (3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn the C

ITA 7708/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah
Section 143(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8(3)(2) dated 20.11.2019 for AY 2014-15. The Revenue has filed a Cross Objections against he order of the AO for AY 2011-12. AY 2011-12 2. We heard the parties the assessee vide letter dated 06.03.2025 submitted that the assessee

Vodafone India Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn the C

ITA 1119/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah
Section 143(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8(3)(2) dated 20.11.2019 for AY 2014-15. The Revenue has filed a Cross Objections against he order of the AO for AY 2011-12. AY 2011-12 2. We heard the parties the assessee vide letter dated 06.03.2025 submitted that the assessee

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moderate Credit Corporation Pvt. Ltd., West Bengal

ITA 6223/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 147

Pronouncement 17/03/2025 ORDER Per Bench: All the above-captioned appeals of the above-mentioned Assessment Years (hereinafter, the ‘AY’) filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections (hereinafter, the ‘CO’) filed by the above-mentioned assessees contain common grounds and facts; therefore, these appeals and COs were heard together and these ... when original assessment was annulled.” 4. That the cross objector craves the leave to add, amend, modify, delete any of the ground(s) of cross objection before or at the time of hearing.” 3.2 Grounds raised by the Revenue in the appeal of Moderate Credit Corp

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Green Mark Infra Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6208/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Shri Saurav Aggarwal, Of Income Tax D-31, Pushpanjali Central Circle-18, First Floor, Enclave, Pitampura, Jhandewalan, New Delhi- New Delhi-110034 110055. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Ahlpa7628J The Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Shri Sant Lal Aggarwal, Of Income Tax D-31, Pushpanjali Central Circle-18, First Floor, Enclave, Pitampura, New Jhandewalan, Delhi-110034 New Delhi-110055. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aewpa7133C

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr.Adv
Section 127Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 292BSection 292C

validly assumed jurisdiction u/s 153A of the Act. Aggrieved by these findings of the ld CIT(A), the assessee has filed cross objection before us in the case of Jagat Project Ltd for AY 2009-10 in CO 16/Del/2021. Before us, the assessee has also raised yet another additional

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Green Mark Infra Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6206/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

erstwhile DCIT, CC-9, New Delhi (now CC-18, New Delhi) (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). The assessee has filed a Cross Objection for AY 2010-11. 2. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has pointed out that the assessee has filed a Cross Objection ... raised before us and assumption of jurisdiction is found to be vitiated. All the subsequent proceedings are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the Cross Objection of the assessee are allowed and the impugned assessment orders are quashed. Consequently, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open

Sbw Udyog Limited, Prayagraj vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 27/ALLD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh.Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2021-22 Sbw Udyog Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 44, Thornhill Road, Prayagraj Tax, Circle-1, Prayagraj Pan:Aadcs2883B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 .03.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 31.01.2024, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Cpc Bengaluru, Under Section, 143(1) Dated 17.10.2022. Subsequently, The Said Appeal Was Migrated To The Nfac & Later On, The Appeal Proceedings Were Transferred To The Additional / Jcit(A), Aurangabad, Who Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India Has Observed In The Notice Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Reads As Under:- "The Income Tax Department Recognizes & Is Sensitive To The Hardships Being Faced By Taxpayers In Coping With The Challenges Posed By Covid-19 Pandemic." Consequently, Appeal Is Liable To Be Allowed.

For Appellant: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

further submitted that section 253(5) of the Income Tax Act permitted the appellate tribunal to admit an appeal or the filing of cross objection after the relevant period referred to in sub section (3) or sub section (4) if it was satisfied, that there was sufficient cause

ACIT, Ncr Building, Jaipur vs. Hans Raj Agarwal, Vidhyadhar Nagar Jaipur

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1253/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Vijay, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250

NC1/5, Sector No. 1, Main Jaipur. Road, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABBPA8231D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent Cross Objections No. 1/JPR/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 1253/JPR/2024) fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 Hans Raj Agarwal, cuke The ACIT , NC1/5, Sector ... order is to dispose of the above captioned appeal filed by the department and separate appeal filed by the assessee in the form of Cross-objections No. 1/JPR/2025 on 11.02.2025, as the issues raised before us pertain to challenge to the impugned order 14.08.2024, passed by NFAC

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 159/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 & Cross Objection Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Dcit Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar Central Circle-2(4), 1, Nilkanth Complex, Nr. Vs. Ahmedabad Tv-9, Jivraj Park, Gujarat – 380051 Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar & Dcit 1, Nilkanth Complex, Nr. Central Circle-2(4), Tv-9, Jivraj Park, Gujarat Ahmedabad - 380051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanpt3721E (Appellant / Cross Objector) .. (Respondent) Shri Vivek Chavda & Shri Nishit Assessee By : Jesur, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. Dr 06/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2025

For Appellant: Jesur, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 68

TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 & CROSS OBJECTION Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ DCIT Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar Central Circle ... Ahmedabad, (in short ‘the CIT(A)’), all dated 13.11.2023 for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The assessee has filed cross objections in respect of all the three appeals of the Revenue. ITA Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 A/w. CO Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 - [Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar] A.Ys

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 158/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 & Cross Objection Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Dcit Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar Central Circle-2(4), 1, Nilkanth Complex, Nr. Vs. Ahmedabad Tv-9, Jivraj Park, Gujarat – 380051 Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar & Dcit 1, Nilkanth Complex, Nr. Central Circle-2(4), Tv-9, Jivraj Park, Gujarat Ahmedabad - 380051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanpt3721E (Appellant / Cross Objector) .. (Respondent) Shri Vivek Chavda & Shri Nishit Assessee By : Jesur, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. Dr 06/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2025

For Appellant: Jesur, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 68

TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 & CROSS OBJECTION Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ DCIT Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar Central Circle ... Ahmedabad, (in short ‘the CIT(A)’), all dated 13.11.2023 for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The assessee has filed cross objections in respect of all the three appeals of the Revenue. ITA Nos. 157, 158 & 159/Ahd/2024 A/w. CO Nos. 39, 40 & 41/Ahd/2024 - [Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar] A.Ys