How many judgments cite Raghavan Nair v. ACIT?

21 judgments on BharatTax cite Raghavan Nair v. ACIT (402 ITR 400), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Raghavan Nair v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 12A, Section 12AB, Section 139(1), Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 80G(5).

Raghavan Nair v. ACIT

402 ITR 400High Court2018#5598 most cited

What is Raghavan Nair v. ACIT authority for?

An Assessing Officer is not precluded from considering an assessee's contention that capital gains disclosed in the return are not exigible to tax, even in the absence of a revised return, because tax cannot be collected except by the authority of law. If capital gains are wrongly offered, no tax should be levied.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Raghavan Nair v ACIT · section 143 · revised return · capital gains exigibility · assessment of capital gains · section 265 · Article 265 Constitution of India · tax authority of law · wrong offer of capital gains

Sections most often in play

Section 12A Section 12AB Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 80G(5)Section 119 Section 139(4)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 54f section 2(15)section 54 section 119 long term capital gains change of opinion section 143(1)(a)advance tax registration under section 12a tax deducted at source long term capital gain income-tax officer

Judgments citing Raghavan Nair v. ACIT

Zafar Iqbal, Siliguri vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Siliguri

ITA 1170/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 54F

…y Cost of stamp duty, registration cost etc. Rs.1,90,20,000/- Rs. 15,42,500/- Amount paid to occupant tenants Rs. 98,00,000/- Lawyer's fees and other expenses for all deeds and agreements TOTAL Rs. 10,00,000/- Rs.3,13,62,500/- In Raghavan Nair vs. ACIT (2018) 402 ITR 400 (Ker HC), it has been held that if the capital gain has been wrongly offered in return, no tax should be levied as tax cannot be collected except by authority of law as per Article 265 of the Constitution of India. And it has been held in the case of S. R. Kosthi vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj) that regardless of whether the revised return filed…

Assam Gas Company Limited, Duliajan vs. DCIT/ ACIT, Circle 1/Dbr, Dibrugarh

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/GTY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 438Section 43B

…“1. For that the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Limited vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) was stated to be distinguished while delivering the Judgement by Hon'ble 1 Kerala High Court in the case of Raghavan Nair vs ACIT & Anr. (2018) 402 ITR 400 (KER.) following Judgement delivered in the case of CIT vs. Shelly Products & Anr. (2003) 261 ITR (SC) 367. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) referred Judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Alom Extrusions Limited (2009) wherein it was decided that the provisions of I.T.A. No. 66/GTY/2025 Assam Gas Company Limited Section 43B must be strictly com…

Thomas Cherian, Thane vs. DCIT Circle Intl. Txn

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 776/COCH/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2021-22 Thomas Cherian .......... Appellant A-2, Happy House, Sector A9, Navi Mumbai Vashi, Thane 400703 [Pan: Apjpc6676G] Vs. Dcit (International Taxation) .......... Respondent Thiruvananthapuram Appellant By: Shri Vardhaman Jain, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Veni Raj, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Vardhaman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50CSection 53C

…to assess the same, as it is the duty of the AO o assess the correct income in accordance with law placing reliance on the CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) and decision of the 4 Thomas Cherian Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Raghavan Nair v. ACIT [2018] 402 ITR 400. The appellant also filed objection to the value adopted by the DVO. On due consideration of the objections filed by the appellant the DRP issued instructions on 24.08.2023 directing the AO to adopt the value of property as per valuation done by the DVO, i.e., Rs. 3,17,78,000/-. However, rejected the contention of the appellant that the property…

Shri Balashah Bava Sanstha Sarvajanik Trust, Anand vs. The CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee/applicant trust is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 304/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G(5)

…t would inspire confidence in him that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the department.” 8. In the case of Raghavan Nair vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) [2018] 89 taxmann.com 212 (Kerala)/[2018] 253 Taxman 379 (Kerala)/[2018] 402 ITR 400 (Kerala)[04-01-2018], the High Court made the following observations: “The short question arising for consideration, is whether in the absence of a revised return, the Assessing Officer is precluded from considering, in a proceedings under section 143 the contention of the assessee that the capital gains disclosed in the return filed by him is n…

Shri Balashah Bava Sanstha Sarvajanik Trust, Anand vs. The CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee/applicant trust is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 303/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80G(5)

Institute Management Committee Iti Jhalawar, Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 41/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee In This Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds;

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,"SMC” JAIPUR श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य एव श्री नरेन्द्र कुमार, न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.39 & 41/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Institute Management बनाम ITO, Committee ITI Jhalawar, Vs. Ward Jhalawar, RICO Road, Kota Jhalawar स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACF17228L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. राज…

Institute Management Committee Iti Jhalawar, Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 39/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee In This Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds;

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,"SMC" JAIPUR श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य एव श्री नरेन्द्र कुमार, न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.39 & 41/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Institute Management बनाम ITO, Ward Committee ITI Jhalawar, Vs. Jhalawar, RICO Road, Kota Jhalawar स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACF17228L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. राज…

Devendra Mehta, Jabalpur vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 80/JAB/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadaledevendra Mehta, Vs Dcit, 1084, Sanjivani Nagar, Circle-2(1), Jabalpur-482003 (M.P.) Jabalpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afppm8269P Assessee By Shri Sughosh Bhamore & Shri Hitesh Trivedi Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2023

Section 10Section 133Section 143(1)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Devendra Mehta, vs DCIT, 1084, Sanjivani Nagar, Circle-2(1), Jabalpur-482003 (M.P.) Jabalpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AFPPM8269P Assessee By Shri Sughosh Bhamore & Shri Hitesh Trivedi Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr.DR Date of hearing 13/09/2023 Date of Pronouncement 20/09/2023 O R D E R PER OM PRAKASH KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 24.05.2022 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- National Facel…

Shri Ranjeet Singh, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (1), Bathinda

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

ITA 91/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Digvijai Chaudhary, Sr. DR

Section 96

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 91/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sh. Ranjeet Singh Vs. The Income Tax Officer, St. No. 3, Paras Ram Ward -1(1), Bathinda Nagar, Bathinda [PAN: BWSPS0439N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sh. Sudhir Sehgal Adv. & Sh. A.K. Junega, ITP Respondent by: Sh. Digvijai Chaudhary, Sr. DR I.T.A. No. 135/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s Ranjeet Poultry Farm, Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Bathinda Road, Goniana, Tax, Circle-1, Bathinda Mandi, Ba…

Young Women'S Christian Association of Delhi, New Delhi vs. ITO (Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1584/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Saten Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…. ITO (2007) 108 ITD 577 (Mum). 6.5 In support of the assessee’s case reliance was placed on the following decisions also:- (i) Kalvindee Rail Nirman (Engineers) Ltd. vs. CIT & Another (2017) 394 ITR 684 (Raj); and (ii) Raghvan Nair vs. ACIT & another (2018) 402 ITR 400 (Ker) 6.6 The Ld. DR, on the other hand supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). According to him, the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shelly Products & Another (supra) applies to the case of the assessee as held by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have given our careful thought to the rival submissions and perused the material available in the records…

Gmr Energy Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 526/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…. the provisions of IT law and deduction / relief not claimed should be allowed if the same is permissible in law: 7. CBDT Circular No. 14(XL-35), dated 11-4-1955 29-31 29-31 8. 32-36 10 35 Kerala High Court in the case of Raghavan Nair v. Asstt. CIT [2018] (402 ITR 400) 9. Parekh Bros. vs CIT (150 ITR 105) / (15 Taxman 37-46 Held 37- 38 539) (Kerala High Court) 10. ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of 47-59 8 59 Perlos Telecommunication & Electronic Components India (P) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (IT Appeal No.1037 (Mad.) of 2013, dated 18.11.2013) ITA Nos.513 & 526/Bang/2022 M/s. GMR Energy Limited, Bangalore Page 6 of…

Gmr Energy Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 513/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

Shiv Kumar Sharma, Gzbd vs. Ward 2(2)(3), Gzbd

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 120/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi(Assessment Year : 2018-19

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 194LSection 254

…be collected under the correct head. Anything which is unauthorisedly levied and collected will be illegal and without sanction of law. Here it will be relevant to refer to the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Raghavan Nair Vs ACIT [2018] 402 ITR 400 (Ker) wherein the Hon’ble Court has observed as under : 10. “The short question arising for consideration, therefore, is whether in the absence of a revised return, the Assessing Officer is precluded from considering, in a proceedings under section 143 of the Act, the contention of the assessee that the capital gains disclosed in the return file…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 37Section 37(1)

…ee had declared the income/loss from F&O derivatives as capital gain instead of business income. Thus it is a case of claim under wrong head of income. For this proposition, the assessee also placed reliance on the following decisions:- Raghavan Nair v. ACIT, 402 ITR 400 (Ker) Wipro Ltd. v. DCIT in ITA No.879/2008 dated 25.3.2015 Karnataka High Court CIT v. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd., 409 ITR 358 (Ker) Satish S. Prabhu v. ACIT 114 taxmann.com 88 (Mum. Trib) CIT v. Sam Global Securities Ltd., 360 ITR 682 (Del) EBR Enterprises v. UOI, 415 ITR 139 (Bom) CIT v. Nashik Road Deolali Vyapaari Sah. Bank Ltd., 76 taxmann.…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 37Section 37(1)

M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant, Kota vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 688/JPR/2019[0]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Ranka &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Section 12ASection 133ASection 271F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 688/JP/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/s Wholesale Cloth Merchant cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. PAN No.: AAATW 0127 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Ambrish Bedi (…

ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Anant Raj Ltd., New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5677/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 4Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5169/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Anant Raj Limited, v. ACIT, E-2, ARA Centre, Range-2, Jhandewalan Extension, Circle-2(2), New Delhi-110055 New Delhi TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 5677/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, v. M/s Anant Raj Limited, Range-2, E-2, ARA Centre, Circle-2(2), Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri V.K. Bindal, CA, Ms. Swee…

Anant Raj Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-2, Circle-2(2), New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5169/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 4Section 50C

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bip Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1366/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1366/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Cir-2(1) Kolkata......................................………………………….................................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/S. Bip Developers Pvt. Ltd.........................................................................................Respondent Ground Floor, Building Beta Bengal Intelligent Park, Block-Ep & Gp, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 091. [Pan: Aabcb 6203 A] Appearances By: Shri Supriyo Pal, Jcit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca & Shri Saurabh Gupta, Aca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 14, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 18, 2019 Order Per P.M. Jagtp, Vice-(Kz)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘(C)’, KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri A.T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 1366/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, CIR-2(1) Kolkata......................................………………………….................................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Vs M/s. BIP Developers Pvt. Ltd.........................................................................................Respondent Ground Floor, Building Beta Bengal Intelligent Park, Block-EP & GP, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 091. [PAN: AABCB 6203 A] Appearance…

Sri.Suhail Ameer Manappat, Kochi vs. The DCIT(Int.Taxation), Kochi

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

ITA 296/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sri. Rajinark P

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM ITA No.296/Coch/2018 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 Sri. Suhail Ameer Ahmed The Dy.Commissioner of 3 RDS, Nedungadan Vs. Income-tax (International Residency, St.Benedict Rd Taxation), Kochi. Kochi – 682 018. PAN : ADTPA2400Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR Respondent by : Sri. Rajinark P. Date of Pronouncement : 10.04.2019 Date of Hearing : 04.04.2018 O R D E R Per George George K, JM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the Commissioner of In…