← 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

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S New World Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5051/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S. New World Buildcon Pvt. Acit, Central Circle-22, Ltd., New Delhi 401, Vipps Centre, 2 Community Complex, Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaccn1600L (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.120/Del/2015 [In Ita No.5051/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 With C.O. No.218/Del/2012 [In Ita No.4011/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.1/Del/2025 [In Ita No.4010/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. New World Buildcon Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Central Circle-22, 401, Vipps Centre, 2 New Delhi Community Complex, Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaccn1600L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 153C

Date of hearing 29.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.02.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These Revenue’s three appeals and assessee’s as many cross objections i.e. ITA No.5051/Del/2012 with C.O. No.120/Del/2015; ITA No. 4011/Del/2011 with C.O. No. 218/Del/2012 and ITA No. 4010/Del/2011 with C.O. No. 01/Del/2025, are directed against ... Nos.120/Del/2015; 218/Del/2012 & 1/Del/2025 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that the Revenue’s instant three appeals as well as assessee’s cross objections involve a common backdrop of facts. Learned departmental authorities appear to have carried out a search action on 05.12.2007 in M/s. Kohinoor Foods

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. New World Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4010/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. M/S. New World Buildcon Pvt. Acit, Central Circle-22, Ltd., New Delhi 401, Vipps Centre, 2 Community Complex, Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaccn1600L (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.120/Del/2015 [In Ita No.5051/Del/2012] Assessment Year: 2006-07 With C.O. No.218/Del/2012 [In Ita No.4011/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2007-08 With C.O. No.1/Del/2025 [In Ita No.4010/Del/2011] Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. New World Buildcon Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Central Circle-22, 401, Vipps Centre, 2 New Delhi Community Complex, Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaccn1600L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 153C

Date of hearing 29.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.02.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These Revenue’s three appeals and assessee’s as many cross objections i.e. ITA No.5051/Del/2012 with C.O. No.120/Del/2015; ITA No. 4011/Del/2011 with C.O. No. 218/Del/2012 and ITA No. 4010/Del/2011 with C.O. No. 01/Del/2025, are directed against ... Nos.120/Del/2015; 218/Del/2012 & 1/Del/2025 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that the Revenue’s instant three appeals as well as assessee’s cross objections involve a common backdrop of facts. Learned departmental authorities appear to have carried out a search action on 05.12.2007 in M/s. Kohinoor Foods

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mulliambal Rathnasamy Pitchakannu Eraavanan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1810/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/2024 [In Ita No. 1810/Chny/2024] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Arvind E & Mrs. Baskaravalli Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), (Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mrp Investigation Building, Eraavanan), No. 4, Rice Mill Road, Chennai. Erimedu, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045. [Pan:Aaape5554D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Dr Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit Drew Our Attention To Additional Grounds Raised By The Appellant – Revenue. He Submits That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate
Section 159Section 2

appeal, wherein, we confirmed the order of the ld. CIT(A) in holding that the protective assessment is bad in law, consequently, the Cross Objection arising out of the said Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 1810/Chny/2024 becomes academic and dismissed accordingly. 12. In the result, both the appeal filed ... Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed. Order pronounced on 26th February, 2025 at Chennai. (JAGADISH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 26.02.2025 Vm/- 15 I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/24 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/24 आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant, 2.""थ"/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु"/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem