M.S. BUILDERS,MORADABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(1), MORADABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the AO's action of treating entire finished goods as sales was incorrect. The assessee followed the 'Project Completion Method' for revenue recognition, and sales are booked upon execution of sale deeds and physical possession. The advances received should not be taxed as income until the sale is concluded.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in real estate business, filed its return for AY 2018-19. The Assessing Officer (AO) assessed income at INR 2,36,30,393/- after treating advances received for flat bookings as sales. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, confirming an addition of Rs. 2,13,49,415/-.
What were the issues?
Whether advances received for property bookings can be treated as sales and taxed in the year of receipt, when the assessee follows the 'Project Completion Method' for revenue recognition?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 145,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI B BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.12.2024 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10041203 assessed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] arising out of the assessment order dated 19.04.2021 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee company is engaged in the business of construction of housing Estates, Apartments, shopping Centers, industrial building, offices, colonies, clubs, cinemas, de
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026