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

ITO, W-4, Panchkula vs. Smt. Seema Bishnoi, Panchkula

In the result appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 103/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargthe Ito Vs. Smt. Seema Bishnoi Ward-4, Panchkula H.No. 906, Sec-08, Panchkula

For Appellant: Shri. A.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G.S. Phani Kishore, CI TDR

Section 148Section 54BSection 54F

…the exemption under the correct head even when the same had been claimed under the wrong section. The reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Raghavan Nair Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Another [2018] 402 ITR 400 (Ker). Reliance was also placed on the following case laws: • Shyam Sunder Makhija Vs. ITO 38 ITD 125 (Jaipur Trib.) • Manoj Kumar Sabharwal Vs. ITO ITA No. 3938/Del/2017 • ITO Vs. Saroj Devi Aggarwal ITA No. 397/JP/2016 • Manoj Behl Vs. ITO ITA No. 147/JP/2013 • ACIT Vs. OM Prakash ITA No. 647/JP/2011 • CIT Vs. M. Kalpagam 227 ITR 722(Mad) • DC…