Facts
The assessee, engaged in real estate development, declared income under the Income Disclosure Scheme (IDS) 2016. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions concerning under-reported profits from old and new real estate projects. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) allowed relief in part for the first addition and entirely for the second addition, leading to cross-appeals.
Held
The Tribunal held that the IDS declaration must be kept separate from regular accounts and disallowed the claim to reduce WIP by the IDS amount. For revenue recognition, it was held that it should be based on the execution of legally enforceable agreements, not just booking or allotment letters. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings regarding the disallowed expenses and the partial confirmation of additions for revenue recognition.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee is entitled to reduce its Work-In-Progress (WIP) by the amount declared under IDS 2016, and regarding the correct stage for revenue recognition in real estate projects based on legally enforceable agreements.
Sections Cited
Section 133A, Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 139, Section 180(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY
These cross-appeals by the assessee and Revenue are directed appeals by the assessee and Revenue are directed appeals by the assessee and Revenue are directed against order dated 30.08.2023 against order dated 30.08.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Pune tax (Appeals), Pune-11 [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for 11 [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2016 assessment year 2016-17.
The grounds raised by the assessee are The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: reproduced as under:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax (Appeals) - 11 PUNE has erred in confirming the addition of 11 PUNE has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ Rs. 5,75,00,000/- being income declared under the IDS Scheme 2016 as being income declared under the IDS Scheme 2016 as reduced from the opening reduced from the opening WIP, The Appellant therefore prays that the addition of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ The Appellant therefore prays that the addition of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ The Appellant therefore prays that the addition of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- on account difference in opening WIP being unwarranted, illegal, bad account difference in opening WIP being unwarranted, illegal, bad account difference in opening WIP being unwarranted, illegal, bad-in-law be deleted. 2.1 The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under: The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under: The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under:
On the facts and in the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the of the case and in law, the Ld CITIA) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.20,15,94,392/ Ld CITIA) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.20,15,94,392/ Ld CITIA) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.20,15,94,392/- holding that the Assessing Officer has accepted the method of holding that the Assessing Officer has accepted the method of holding that the Assessing Officer has accepted the method of accounting in earlie accounting in earlier years without appreciating: (i) The fact that the assessee maintained The fact that the assessee maintained two set of balance sheets two set of balance sheets having different figures of inventory and advance, audited by two having different figures of inventory and advance, audited by two having different figures of inventory and advance, audited by two different auditors, which raises significant doubts regarding the different auditors, which raises significant doubts regarding the different auditors, which raises significant doubts regarding the credibility of the books of accounts of the company. (i credibility of the books of accounts of the company. (ii) The fact that ) The fact that the Guidance Note on Acco the Guidance Note on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions unting for Real Estate Transactions-2012 issued by ICAI does not provide for including indirect expenses as issued by ICAI does not provide for including indirect expenses as issued by ICAI does not provide for including indirect expenses as cost of construction/cost of project, but still the assessee has cost of construction/cost of project, but still the assessee has cost of construction/cost of project, but still the assessee has included admin expenses, selling and distribution expenses, included admin expenses, selling and distribution expenses, included admin expenses, selling and distribution expenses, employees cost and othe employees cost and other expenses in WIP of the projects namely r expenses in WIP of the projects namely Skyline and Aurum Skyline and Aurum-
1. 1.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of 1.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting add the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting add the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs.2,62,17,851/ Rs.2,62,17,851/- made.
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 3 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 &
Briefly stated facts of the case are that Briefly stated facts of the case are that during the ye during the year under consideration, the assessee was eng the assessee was engaged in the business of building aged in the business of building and developing real estate properties and developing real estate properties. The assessee filed return of . The assessee filed return of income for relevant assessment year assessment year on 17.10.2016 on 17.10.2016 declaring total income at Rs.11,58,65,380/ income at Rs.11,58,65,380/-. The return of income filed by the come filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) were issued and complied with. In the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated with. In the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated with. In the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.12.2018, the Assessing Officer made 31.12.2018, the Assessing Officer made two additions aggregating two additions aggregating to Rs.28,53,12,234/ Rs.28,53,12,234/-. The first addition of Rs.25,90,93,383/ Rs.25,90,93,383/- was made for under reported profit in relation to two old under reported profit in relation to two old under reported profit in relation to two old real estate projects namely ‘Skyline Skyline’ and ‘Unique Aurum-I I’, which were commenced commenced prior prior to to 1.4.2012 1.4.2012. The second addition of Rs.2,62,17,851/- was made for under reported profit in respect of was made for under reported profit in respect of was made for under reported profit in respect of projects commenced from 01.04.2012 namely projects commenced from 01.04.2012 namely ‘Unique Aurum Unique Aurum-II’, ‘Unique Castle’, ‘Unique Signature Unique Signature’ and ‘Unique Homes Unique Homes’.
3.1 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief in respect On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief in respect On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief in respect of first addition, whereas allowed entire relief in respect of second hereas allowed entire relief in respect of second hereas allowed entire relief in respect of second addition.
3.2 Aggrieved, both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal both the assessee and the Revenue are in appeal before the Tribunal by way of raising grounds a before the Tribunal by way of raising grounds as reproduced above. s reproduced above.
Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has filed a Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has filed a Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has filed a Paper Book in two volume containing pages k in two volume containing pages 100 and 144.
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 4 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 &
The ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee and ground No. The ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee and ground No. The ground No. 1 of the appeal of the assessee and ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue are interconnected and therefore, 1 of the appeal of the Revenue are interconnected and t 1 of the appeal of the Revenue are interconnected and t both these grounds are both these grounds are taken up together for adjudication. adjudication.
5.1 Briefly stated, facts Briefly stated, facts qua the issue in dispute qua the issue in dispute are that a company namely “M/s M/s Unique Shanti Developers p ltd Unique Shanti Developers p ltd” commenced two real estate projects namely ‘Skyline’ and ‘Unique Aurum-I’ two real estate projects namely ‘Skyline’ and ‘Unique Aurum two real estate projects namely ‘Skyline’ and ‘Unique Aurum (herein after referred referred as ‘old projects’) for construction and for construction and development of flats in Mumbai in financial year 2010-11. Later on development of flats in Mumbai in financial year 2010 development of flats in Mumbai in financial year 2010 w.e.f. 25/11/2014, the company was converted into a he company was converted into a ‘Limited Liability Partnership’ (LLP) i.e. present assessee before us. In Liability Partnership’ (LLP) i.e. present assessee before us. I Liability Partnership’ (LLP) i.e. present assessee before us. I respect of those two old projects namely two old projects namely ‘Skyline Skyline’ and ‘Unique Aurum-I’, which were comme which were commenced in financial year 2010 nced in financial year 2010-11 by predecessor company predecessor company, the assessee followed a unique meth he assessee followed a unique method of accounting for declaring the profit. It is the contention of the for declaring the profit. It is the contention of the for declaring the profit. It is the contention of the assessee that Institute of chartered Accountants of India(I nstitute of chartered Accountants of India(ICAI) nstitute of chartered Accountants of India(I Guidelines, 2012 issued issued in respect of builder and developer in respect of builder and developer for following ‘percentage completion method’ for computation of profit following ‘percentage completion method’ for computation following ‘percentage completion method’ for computation from real estate project are effective only from 01.04.2012 , from real estate project are effective only from 01.04.2012 from real estate project are effective only from 01.04.2012 therefore, the assessee did not follow said method for recognizing therefore, the assessee did not follow said method for recognizing therefore, the assessee did not follow said method for recognizing profit from those old projects and profit from those old projects and followed ‘project completion project completion method’ . But, we find that the method followed by , we find that the method followed by , we find that the method followed by the assessee in respect of those two projects is neither se two projects is neither ‘project completion method ject completion method’ nor ‘percentage completion method percentage completion method’ and it is a unique method s a unique method, which is combination of both methods. which is combination of both methods. According to the method According to the method Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 5 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & followed, a certain percentage of profit was es a certain percentage of profit was estimated on expenses timated on expenses incurred on the projects including sales and administrative incurred on the projects including sales and administrative incurred on the projects including sales and administrative expenses for any particular year particular year and offered to tax and offered to tax. Thereafter, closing work in progress work in progress (WIP) has been worked out by adding all worked out by adding all the expenses along with estimated profit and carried over to the expenses along with estimated profit and c the expenses along with estimated profit and c subsequent year. Further, a Further, advances received by the assessee dvances received by the assessee against sale of flats/shops, against sale of flats/shops, have been also carried forward to carried forward to subsequent year under the head “current liabilities”. The final profit subsequent year under the head “current liabilities”. subsequent year under the head “current liabilities”. from the projects was declared in the year of c from the projects was declared in the year of completion ompletion of projects after deducting estimated profit declared in earlier years. deducting estimated profit declared in earlier years. deducting estimated profit declared in earlier years. According to the assessee this method of accounting was accepted by the AO to the assessee this method of accounting was accepted to the assessee this method of accounting was accepted in all earlier assessment years from assessment year 2010-11 to in all earlier assessment years from assessment year 2010 in all earlier assessment years from assessment year 2010 assessment year 2015 assessment year 2015-16.
5.2 For other projects namely For other projects namely ‘Unique Aurum-II’, , ‘Unique Castle’, ‘Unique Homes’ and and ‘Unique Signature’ ( herein after referred as ( herein after referred as ‘new projects’) , which , which were commenced by the assessee on or after sessee on or after March, 2012, the assessee adopted he assessee adopted ‘percentage completion metho percentage completion method’ of accounting as per ICAI Guidelines, 2012 for real estate of accounting as per ICAI Guidelines, 2012 for real estate of accounting as per ICAI Guidelines, 2012 for real estate transactions for revenue recognition. Accordingly, the assessee transactions for revenue recognition. Accordingly, transactions for revenue recognition. Accordingly, submitted that revenue was recognized for the above projects as per revenue was recognized for the above projects as per revenue was recognized for the above projects as per ICAI Guidelines and profit was offered for taxation after assessment ICAI Guidelines and profit was offered for taxation after asse ICAI Guidelines and profit was offered for taxation after asse year 2012-13, which has been duly accepted in the assessment which has been duly accepted in the assessment which has been duly accepted in the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. order passed by the Assessing Officer. The relevant schedule of The relevant schedule of notes on account (i.e. part of financial statemen notes on account (i.e. part of financial statement for year under t for year under Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 6 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & consideration), available on paper book page 67 is reprodu , available on paper book page 67 is reproduced as , available on paper book page 67 is reprodu under:
“3. Revenue Recognition: a) During the year the assessee has 3. Revenue Recognition: a) During the year the assessee has 3. Revenue Recognition: a) During the year the assessee has completed Projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum completed Projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum completed Projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum-I. Revenue is recognised for all the Flats/Shops sold upto 31st March 2016 is recognised for all the Flats/Shops sold upto 31st March 2016 is recognised for all the Flats/Shops sold upto 31st March 2016 by accounting for Sales. Accordingly balance Profit is by accounting for Sales. Accordingly balance Profit is by accounting for Sales. Accordingly balance Profit is offerred for taxation by adjusting Profits already offered for tax purpose in taxation by adjusting Profits already offered for tax purpose in taxation by adjusting Profits already offered for tax purpose in earlier years on estimated basis earlier years on estimated basis b) The Assesse is following ICAI b) The Assesse is following ICAI Guidelines on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions 2012 for Guidelines on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions 2012 for Guidelines on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions 2012 for under construction projects namely Unique Aurum II, Unique under construction projects namely Unique Aurum II, Unique under construction projects namely Unique Aurum II, Unique Castle and Unique Signature and accordingly proportionate Castle and Unique Signature and accordingly proportionate Castle and Unique Signature and accordingly proportionate Revenue is recognised on percentage completion Me Revenue is recognised on percentage completion Me Revenue is recognised on percentage completion Method of ® accounting as pe accounting as per ICAI guidelines in respect of Flats/Shops sold guidelines in respect of Flats/Shops sold upto 81st March 2016 and and which are secured by Contracts upto 81st March 2016 and and which are secured by Contracts upto 81st March 2016 and and which are secured by Contracts as on reporting date as reasonable level of development of the as on reporting date as reasonable level of development of the as on reporting date as reasonable level of development of the Project is already achieved during the year for above mentioned Project is already achieved during the year for above mentioned Project is already achieved during the year for above mentioned Projects.” 5.3 As far as the projects namely r as the projects namely ‘Unique Aurum Unique Aurum-I’ and ‘Skyline’ are concerned, same were completed during the year under same were completed during the year under same were completed during the year under consideration and revenue amounting to Rs.204,06,97,400/- was consideration and revenue amounting to Rs.204,06,97,400/ consideration and revenue amounting to Rs.204,06,97,400/ recognized during the year during the year from those two projects. se two projects. Against said revenue, the assessee recorded opening work in progress essee recorded opening work in progress (WIP) as essee recorded opening work in progress on 1.04.2015 for financial inancial year 2015-16 ( i.e. for the assessment year under consideration) year under consideration) at Rs.208,25,66,949/- as against the closing WIP as on 31.03.2015 closing WIP as on 31.03.2015 for financial year financial year 2014-15 at Rs.202,50,66,949/-. The assessee explained that difference between . The assessee explained that difference between . The assessee explained that difference between these two figures of Rs.5,75,00,000/ these two figures of Rs.5,75,00,000/- was on account of income was on account of income declared for financial year 2015 ared for financial year 2015-16 by the assessee under the 16 by the assessee under the Income Disclosure scheme, 2016 (IDS) and therefore, the opening isclosure scheme, 2016 (IDS) and therefore, the opening isclosure scheme, 2016 (IDS) and therefore, the opening WIP for financial year 2015 year 2015-16 was increased by an amount of 16 was increased by an amount of Rs.5,75,00,000/-. The opening WIP . The opening WIP of Rs.202,50,66,949/ of Rs.202,50,66,949/- for Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 7 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & financial year 2015 financial year 2015-16 includes construction and de 16 includes construction and development expenses incurred on the projects incurred on the projects for the period since financial year for the period since financial year 2010-11 to financial financial year 2014-15; administration administration and selling/employee cost expenses selling/employee cost expenses since financial year 2010 financial year 2010-11 to financial year 2014 financial year 2014-15 amounting to Rs.20,15,94,393/ 15 amounting to Rs.20,15,94,393/- and amount of net profit declared amount of net profit declared from financial year 2010 financial year 2010-11 to financial year 2014- -15. The Assessing Officer has not disputed icer has not disputed amount of net profit net profit and amount of construction and development construction and development expenses for working for working out closing WIP as on 31.03.2015 or opening 2015 or opening WIP as on 1.04.2015 WIP as on 1.04.2015 but he rejected, firstly, claim of t claim of the assessee of inclusion of administration/ sell administration/ selling/ employee cost expenses ing/ employee cost expenses amounting to Rs. 20,15,94,393/ 20,15,94,393/- to closing WIP, , and secondly, inclusion of undisclosed undisclosed income of Rs.5,75,00,000/ of Rs.5,75,00,000/-offered under income disclosure scheme income disclosure scheme to opening WIP for FY 2015 for FY 2015-16, corresponding to assessment year under assessment year under consideration consideration.
5.4 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee of including including admin/selling/employee cost expenses /selling/employee cost expenses of Rs. 20,15,94,393/- to closing WIP to closing WIP as on 31.03.2015 as on 31.03.2015 but rejected inclusion of Rs.5,75,00,000/ of Rs.5,75,00,000/- which was declared which was declared under IDS scheme. scheme. scheme. The The The assessee assessee assessee is is is aggrieved aggrieved aggrieved with with with rejection rejection rejection of of of Rs.5,75,00,000/- added to opening WIP and susequent added to opening WIP and susequent added to opening WIP and susequent deduction against the revenue offered in respect of two old projects. against the revenue offered in respect of two old projects. against the revenue offered in respect of two old projects.
5.5 As far as issue of Rs.5,75,00,000/ issue of Rs.5,75,00,000/- raised by the assessee in raised by the assessee in its sole ground is concerned is concerned, the assessee contended contended that a survey Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 8 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on the assessee LLP on the assessee LLP on 22.09.2016 , wherein the assessee , wherein the assessee made declaration of undisclosed declaration of undisclosed income of Rs.5,75,00,000/ Rs.5,75,00,000/- under IDS for assessment year 2015 IDS for assessment year 2015- 16. The assessee submitted that since this income was declared 16. The assessee submitted that since this income was declared 16. The assessee submitted that since this income was declared prior to completion of projects, to completion of projects, therefore, a suitable accounting a suitable accounting treatment was given in the account treatment was given in the accounts of financial year 2015 of financial year 2015-16 and accordingly, the opening WIP wa the opening WIP was increased by an amount of s increased by an amount of Rs.5,75,00,000/-.
5.6 Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that declaration Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that declaration Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that declaration for extra profit to the extent of Rs.5,75,00,000/ for extra profit to the extent of Rs.5,75,00,000/- was made during was made during the survey operation on the assurance of the survey team that same the survey operation on the assurance of the survey team that same the survey operation on the assurance of the survey team that same can be adjusted in WIP and can be reduced from the profits djusted in WIP and can be reduced from the profits djusted in WIP and can be reduced from the profits declared in AY 2016 declared in AY 2016-17. The assessee further claimed that it had 17. The assessee further claimed that it had already paid taxes at the rate of at the rate of 45% and if same is not allowed to same is not allowed to be reduced from the profits of the assessment year under be reduced from the profits of the assessment year under be reduced from the profits of the assessment year under consideration, then then it would amount to double taxation amount to double taxation and assessee would be liable to pay taxes at the rate of would be liable to pay taxes at the rate of 75% on such would be liable to pay taxes at the rate of income of Rs.5,75,00,000/ income of Rs.5,75,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer in response to The Assessing Officer in response to remand report called for by t remand report called for by the Ld. CIT(A) , submitted that under submitted that under the provisions of IDS IDS-2016, no deduction in respect of any no deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance could be allowed against the income in expenditure or allowance could be allowed against the income in expenditure or allowance could be allowed against the income in respect of which declaration was made. respect of which declaration was made.
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 9 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 5.7 After considering the submission of the assessee and objection After considering the submission of the assessee and objection After considering the submission of the assessee and objection of the Assessing Officer, the Ld. CIT(A) r of the Assessing Officer, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the ejected the contention of the assessee observing as under: assessee observing as under:
“33. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appellant. It is not under dispute that the declaration of Rs. the appellant. It is not under dispute that the declaration of Rs. the appellant. It is not under dispute that the declaration of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- was made by the appellant under IDS-2016 as 2016 as undisclosed income earned from the projects developed by it. Since the declaration is income earned from the projects developed by it. Since the declaration is income earned from the projects developed by it. Since the declaration is made as undisclosed income earned from the projects developed by it, the made as undisclosed income earned from the projects developed by it, the made as undisclosed income earned from the projects developed by it, the appellant cannot increase WIP in its books of accounts, appellant cannot increase WIP in its books of accounts, by adding the said by adding the said declared income and c declared income and cannot reduce this undisclosed profit from the actual annot reduce this undisclosed profit from the actual profit worked out on the basis of books of accounts. I also tend to agree profit worked out on the basis of books of accounts. I also tend to agree profit worked out on the basis of books of accounts. I also tend to agree with the comments of the Assessing Officer in the remand report that if the with the comments of the Assessing Officer in the remand report that if the with the comments of the Assessing Officer in the remand report that if the appellant is allowed to reduce the undisclosed income appellant is allowed to reduce the undisclosed income declared under IDS declared under IDS- 2016, same will defeat the very purpose of the IDS scheme because the 2016, same will defeat the very purpose of the IDS scheme because the 2016, same will defeat the very purpose of the IDS scheme because the appellant will be able to set appellant will be able to set-off his income worked on the basis of books of off his income worked on the basis of books of accounts by the income disclosed in the IDS accounts by the income disclosed in the IDS-2016 scheme. In my opinion, 2016 scheme. In my opinion, the declaration o the declaration of undisclosed income made under IDS-2016 scheme is 2016 scheme is required to be kept separate from the income computed on the basis of required to be kept separate from the income computed on the basis of required to be kept separate from the income computed on the basis of regular books of accounts and therefore the action of the Assessing Officer regular books of accounts and therefore the action of the Assessing Officer regular books of accounts and therefore the action of the Assessing Officer of reducing the opening WIP by Rs. 5,75,00,000/ of reducing the opening WIP by Rs. 5,75,00,000/-correspondi corresponding to declaration made under IDS declaration made under IDS-2016 is upheld.” 5.8 We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. It is the dispute and perused the relevant material on record. It is the dispute and perused the relevant material on record. It is the contention of the assessee contention of the assessee that Rs.5,75,00,000/- - was declared under IDS -2016 in the form of undi in the form of undisclosed income in respect of sclosed income in respect of those two old projects. The assessee se two old projects. The assessee further contended that rate of contended that rate of net profit shown from projects from projects in earlier years was less and therefore, assessee computed higher percentage of the profit on the therefore, assessee computed higher percentage of the profit on the therefore, assessee computed higher percentage of the profit on the expenses and the difference amount was offered as income during nd the difference amount was offered as income during nd the difference amount was offered as income during the survey year. The assessee the survey year. The assessee submitted that it that it was following consistent method of including net profit declared to the work in consistent method of including net profit declared consistent method of including net profit declared progress (WIP) and therefore, this additional income declared also and therefore, this additional income declared also and therefore, this additional income declared also constituted part of work work in progress, which was to be reduced to be reduced from Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 10 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & the total revenue of those two projects for computing profit from for computing profit from those projects. The assessee contended that the additional profit The assessee contended that the additional profit The assessee contended that the additional profit declared is also from tho from those two projects, therefore same therefore same is liable to be included in the work in progress and to be be included in the work in progress and to be reduced from the reduced from the revenue of those two projects for working out the profit se two projects for working out the profit or loss from se two projects for working out the profit those two projects.
5.9 The contentions of the assessee have been examined in the contentions of the assessee have been examined in the contentions of the assessee have been examined in the light of Income disclosure light of Income disclosure scheme announced under the Finance unced under the Finance Act, 2016. The income declaration scheme, 2016 The income declaration scheme, 2016 was an amnesty was an amnesty scheme introduced by scheme introduced by the Government of India as a part of the as a part of the 2016 Union budget to unearth to unearth black money and bring it back into and bring it back into the system. Lasting from 1 the system. Lasting from 1st June to 30th September, September, 2016 the scheme scheme provided provided an an opportunity opportunity to income to income tax and wealth tax tax defaulters to avoid litigation and become compliant by declaring defaulters to avoid litigation and become compliant by declaring defaulters to avoid litigation and become compliant by declaring their assets, thereafter thereafter paying the tax/penalty on them on them at the rate of 45%. The scheme guaranteed immunity fr The scheme guaranteed immunity from prosecution under om prosecution under the Income-Tax Act, Tax Act, Wealth-Tax Act, 1957, and the , and the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (Prohibition) Act, 1988 and also ensured that and also ensured that declarations under it would not be subjected to any scrutiny or declarations under it would not be subjected to any declarations under it would not be subjected to any inquiry. But the scheme prohibited claim of further expenditure or But the scheme prohibited claim of further expenditure or But the scheme prohibited claim of further expenditure or allowance as deduction against the income declared under the allowance as deduction against the income declared under the allowance as deduction against the income declared under the scheme. For ready reference, reference, a relevant provision i.e. i.e. section 180(4) of scheme, is reproduced as under: reproduced as under:
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 11 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 &
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Scheme, any person may 180. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Scheme, any person may 180. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Scheme, any person may make, on or after the date of 10 commencement of this Scheme but make, on or after the date of 10 commencement of this Scheme but make, on or after the date of 10 commencement of this Scheme but before a date to be notified by the before a date to be notified by the Central Government in the Official Central Government in the Official Gazette, a declaration in respect of any income chargeable to tax Gazette, a declaration in respect of any income chargeable to tax Gazette, a declaration in respect of any income chargeable to tax under the Income under the Income-tax Act for any assessment year prior to the tax Act for any assessment year prior to the assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2017 assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2017- (a) for which he has failed to furni (a) for which he has failed to furnish a return under section 139 of the sh a return under section 139 of the Income-tax Act; tax Act; (b) which he has failed to disclose in a return of income furnishe (b) which he has failed to disclose in a return of income furnishe (b) which he has failed to disclose in a return of income furnished by him under the Income him under the Income-tax Act before the date of commencement of this Act before the date of commencement of this Scheme; (c) which has escaped assessment by reason of the omiss (c) which has escaped assessment by reason of the omission or failure ion or failure on the part of such person to furnish a return under the Income on the part of such person to furnish a return under the Income on the part of such person to furnish a return under the Income-tax Act or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment or otherwise. assessment or otherwise. (2) Where the income chargeable to tax is declared in the form of (2) Where the income chargeable to tax is declared in the form of (2) Where the income chargeable to tax is declared in the form of investment in any asset, the fair 20 market value of such asset as on in any asset, the fair 20 market value of such asset as on in any asset, the fair 20 market value of such asset as on the date of commencement of this Scheme shall be deemed to be the the date of commencement of this Scheme shall be deemed to be the the date of commencement of this Scheme shall be deemed to be the undisclosed income for the purposes of sub undisclosed income for the purposes of sub-section (1). (3) The fair market value of any asset shall be determined in such (3) The fair market value of any asset shall be determined in such (3) The fair market value of any asset shall be determined in such manner, as may be prescribed. as may be prescribed. (4) No deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance (4) No deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance (4) No deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance shall be allowed against the income in respect of which shall be allowed against the income in respect of which shall be allowed against the income in respect of which declaration under this section is made. declaration under this section is made.” (emphasis supplied by us) (emphasis supplied by us) 5.10 . On perusal of prescribed form On perusal of prescribed form-I filed by the assessee for filed by the assessee for availing the scheme, which , which is available on paper book page book page 87 to 100 , it is seen that assessee declared , it is seen that assessee declared an amount of Rs. amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- under the scheme under the scheme for difference in i for difference in income as per ICAI guidelines on WIP and income declared f ICAI guidelines on WIP and income declared for AY 2015 or AY 2015-16 for skyline and Aurum-II project. II project. The relevant statement of undisclosed The relevant statement of undisclosed income, which is an Annexure appended to prescribed form-I, income, which is an Annexure appended to prescribed form income, which is an Annexure appended to prescribed form available on paper book page 89 is reproduced as under: available on paper book page 89 is reproduced as under: available on paper book page 89 is reproduced as under:
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 12 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 5.11 Further, on paper book page 92, the assessee ha Further, on paper book page 92, the assessee ha Further, on paper book page 92, the assessee has provided complete detail of calculation of the amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/-, complete detail of calculation of the amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ complete detail of calculation of the amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ which is reproduced as under: which is reproduced as under:
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 13 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 5.12 On perusal of above On perusal of above, it is clear that amount of Rs. it is clear that amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- has been computed as difference in profit in respect has been computed as difference in profit in respect has been computed as difference in profit in respect of all the projects including of all the projects including ‘old’ and ‘new’ projects. Thus projects. Thus, the claim of the assessee that amount pertains to of the assessee that amount pertains to only old projects is old projects is false, wrong and misleading. Further ing. Further, sh Dilesh C shah, shah, during the course of survey explained as how course of survey explained as how profit in respect of projects was profit in respect of projects was under reported in returns filed. The relevant question and answers in returns filed. The relevant question and answers in returns filed. The relevant question and answers recorded during survey proceedings recorded during survey proceedings available on paper book page available on paper book page 98, are reproduced as under: uced as under:
Q.12. Please justify your offer of income under Income Disclosure Scheme, Q.12. Please justify your offer of income under Income Disclosure Scheme, Q.12. Please justify your offer of income under Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016. Ans. As per my knowledge, a declaration under the aforesaid scheme may Ans. As per my knowledge, a declaration under the aforesaid scheme may Ans. As per my knowledge, a declaration under the aforesaid scheme may be made in respect of any income or income in the form of investment in be made in respect of any income or income in the form of investment in be made in respect of any income or income in the form of investment in any assets located in India and acquired from income chargeable to tax any assets located in India and acquired from income chargeable to tax any assets located in India and acquired from income chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act for any assessmen under the Income Tax Act for any assessment year prior to the assessment t year prior to the assessment year 2017-18. The above declaration has been made as per the market 18. The above declaration has been made as per the market 18. The above declaration has been made as per the market value of the undisclosed assets as on 1st June, 2016. Hence, my case is fit value of the undisclosed assets as on 1st June, 2016. Hence, my case is fit value of the undisclosed assets as on 1st June, 2016. Hence, my case is fit for availing this opportunity for disclosure of the company’s undisclosed for availing this opportunity for disclosure of the company’s undisclosed for availing this opportunity for disclosure of the company’s undisclosed income of Rs.5.75 crores. Accordingly, we have filed prescribed Form of Rs.5.75 crores. Accordingly, we have filed prescribed Form of Rs.5.75 crores. Accordingly, we have filed prescribed Form-I for Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 14 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & income Declaration Scheme income Declaration Scheme-2016 and the same will be submitted to the Pr. 2016 and the same will be submitted to the Pr. Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax-13, Mumbai on or before 26.09.2016. 13, Mumbai on or before 26.09.2016. 5.13 In view of above discussion, t In view of above discussion, the contentions of the assessee he contentions of the assessee seeking deduction of income declared under IDS-2016 are not seeking deduction of income declared under IDS seeking deduction of income declared under IDS acceptable for the reason that firstly, the assessee is not entitled acceptable for the reason that the assessee is not entitled for claim of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ for claim of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- as deduction as per section 180(4) of per section 180(4) of Finance Act, 2016, as Finance Act, 2016, as no deduction in respect of any any expenditure or allowance is permitted permitted against the income under the normal under the normal provisions of the Income provisions of the Income-tax in respect of income declaration made in respect of income declaration made under scheme, Secondly Secondly, without prejudice, only part amount out , without prejudice, only part amount out of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- - pertains to old projects and not the whole of and not the whole of amount. Thus, we concur with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that we concur with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that we concur with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that declaration of the undisclosed income made under IDS-2016 is declaration of the undisclosed income made under IDS declaration of the undisclosed income made under IDS required to be treated treated separately from the income calculation ly from the income calculation on the basis of regular books of accounts. ks of accounts. Accordingly, we uphold finding Accordingly, we uphold finding of ld CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. of ld CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. Therefore, the sole ground of he sole ground of appeal of assessee is accordingly dismissed. assessee is accordingly dismissed.
6. The ground No. 1 of the appeal of The ground No. 1 of the appeal of Revenue comprises of two comprises of two parts. In first part , the Revenue has challenged finding of ld CIT(A) parts. In first part , the Revenue has challenged finding of ld CIT(A) parts. In first part , the Revenue has challenged finding of ld CIT(A) on the issue of maintenance of two sets of balance sheet maintenance of two sets of balance sheet maintenance of two sets of balance sheet dated 31/03/2014 by assessee and 31/03/2014 by assessee and having variation in variation in amount of inventory and long term loans and advances and long term loans and advances in th in those balance sheets, raising significant doubts regarding the credibility of the raising significant doubts regarding the credibility of the raising significant doubts regarding the credibility of the books of accounts of the company. In this regard, the Ld. CIT(A) has books of accounts of the company. In this regard, the Ld. CIT(A) has books of accounts of the company. In this regard, the Ld. CIT(A) has Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 15 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & given a detailed finding given a detailed finding. For ready reference, said finding of the Ld. said finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: CIT(A) is reproduced as under:
“16.1 First observation of the Assessing Officer is that M/s Unique 1 First observation of the Assessing Officer is that M/s Unique 1 First observation of the Assessing Officer is that M/s Unique Shanti Developers Pvt. Limited (the predecessor of the appellant) has Shanti Developers Pvt. Limited (the predecessor of the appellant) has Shanti Developers Pvt. Limited (the predecessor of the appellant) has filed two different balance sheets as on 31/03/2014, one before filed two different balance sheets as on 31/03/2014, one before filed two different balance sheets as on 31/03/2014, one before Registrar Registrar Registrar of of of Companies Companies Companies and and and another another another during during during the the the assessment assessment assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has scanned both these balance roceedings. The Assessing Officer has scanned both these balance roceedings. The Assessing Officer has scanned both these balance sheets at page 36 and 37 of the assessment order and has pointed out sheets at page 36 and 37 of the assessment order and has pointed out sheets at page 36 and 37 of the assessment order and has pointed out that there are variations in the figures of long term advances' and that there are variations in the figures of long term advances' and that there are variations in the figures of long term advances' and inventories. 16.2 During the appellate proceedings, th 16.2 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted that e appellant has submitted that the financials dated 16.06.2014 was uploaded by the predecessor the financials dated 16.06.2014 was uploaded by the predecessor the financials dated 16.06.2014 was uploaded by the predecessor company on MCA portal since it was in the process of getting the entity company on MCA portal since it was in the process of getting the entity company on MCA portal since it was in the process of getting the entity converted into a limited liability partnership firm. Accordingly, the converted into a limited liability partnership firm. Accordingly, the converted into a limited liability partnership firm. Accordingly, the private limited com private limited company got converted into LLP on 25.11.2014. In the pany got converted into LLP on 25.11.2014. In the month of October 2014, when Tax audit of M/s Unique Shanti month of October 2014, when Tax audit of M/s Unique Shanti month of October 2014, when Tax audit of M/s Unique Shanti Developers Pvt Ltd was in the process, the auditor observed that Rs. Developers Pvt Ltd was in the process, the auditor observed that Rs. Developers Pvt Ltd was in the process, the auditor observed that Rs. 4,48,6,000/- paid to Ferreira family for S. No. 479/2 at Mira Road on paid to Ferreira family for S. No. 479/2 at Mira Road on paid to Ferreira family for S. No. 479/2 at Mira Road on behalf of Mrs Madhu H. Doshi was wrongly treated as cost of land f Mrs Madhu H. Doshi was wrongly treated as cost of land f Mrs Madhu H. Doshi was wrongly treated as cost of land purchase/land development rights and also a refundable deposit of purchase/land development rights and also a refundable deposit of purchase/land development rights and also a refundable deposit of Rs.1,50,00,000 paid to land owners of Unique Castle Project at Mira Rs.1,50,00,000 paid to land owners of Unique Castle Project at Mira Rs.1,50,00,000 paid to land owners of Unique Castle Project at Mira Road Was wrongly debited as cost of land purchased and included i wrongly debited as cost of land purchased and included in wrongly debited as cost of land purchased and included i closing inventory in the audited balance sheet 16.06.2014 showing total closing inventory in the audited balance sheet 16.06.2014 showing total closing inventory in the audited balance sheet 16.06.2014 showing total inventory at Rs 141,40,65,600/ inventory at Rs 141,40,65,600/-. Hence while finalising Tax Audit . Hence while finalising Tax Audit report, both the entries were corrected appropriately in the books of report, both the entries were corrected appropriately in the books of report, both the entries were corrected appropriately in the books of accounts. At the time of assessment proceeding accounts. At the time of assessment proceedings, it had clarified this s, it had clarified this fact to the assessing officer vide letter dated fact to the assessing officer vide letter dated 24.12.2018. It is submitted 24.12.2018. It is submitted that apart from differences in figures of inventory and long that apart from differences in figures of inventory and long that apart from differences in figures of inventory and long-term loans and advances in schedule 12 of the balance sheet. there is no change in and advances in schedule 12 of the balance sheet. there is no change in and advances in schedule 12 of the balance sheet. there is no change in any other item line of the balance sheet. tem line of the balance sheet. Particulars as head of Financial as filed with Financial as filed with Financials as submitted by Variance Financials as submitted by item line RoC MCA RoC MCA the appellant Long Term Loans & 36,11,46,896 36,11,46,896 42,09,62,896 5,98,16,000 advances Inventories 141,40,65,600 141,40,65,600 135,42,49,600 (5,98,16,000) 16 June, 2014 16 June, 2014 31st October, 2014 16.3 The Assessing Officer in the remand report has not commented 16.3 The Assessing Officer in the remand report has not commented 16.3 The Assessing Officer in the remand report has not commented adversely on the above explanation of the appellant, however, the adversely on the above explanation of the appellant, however, the adversely on the above explanation of the appellant, however, the Assessing Officer has stated that the fact that two set of balance sheet Assessing Officer has stated that the fact that two set of balance sheet Assessing Officer has stated that the fact that two set of balance sheets having different figures of inventory and advance, raises significant having different figures of inventory and advance, raises significant having different figures of inventory and advance, raises significant doubts regarding the credibility of the books of accounts of the doubts regarding the credibility of the books of accounts of the doubts regarding the credibility of the books of accounts of the company. In the rejoinder to the remand report, the appellant has company. In the rejoinder to the remand report, the appellant has company. In the rejoinder to the remand report, the appellant has submitted that this discrepancy was explained during submitted that this discrepancy was explained during the assessment the assessment proceedings proceedings proceedings and and and a a a written written written submission submission submission along along along with with with copies copies copies of of of documentary evidences and copy of agreements to clear the doubts of documentary evidences and copy of agreements to clear the doubts of documentary evidences and copy of agreements to clear the doubts of Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 16 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & the Assessing Officer was filed. The appellant has further submitted the Assessing Officer was filed. The appellant has further submitted the Assessing Officer was filed. The appellant has further submitted that these observations correspond to AY 2015 that these observations correspond to AY 2015-16 and the assessment 16 and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act, for the relevant. of the Act, for the relevant. A.Y. 2015-16 is already 16 is already completed in the completed in the case of LLP, without making any addition. case of LLP, without making any addition. 16.4 I have considered the above submissions. Although the Assessing 16.4 I have considered the above submissions. Although the Assessing 16.4 I have considered the above submissions. Although the Assessing Officer has raised doubts regarding the Officer has raised doubts regarding the correctness of books of accounts correctness of books of accounts of the appellant for A.Y. 2015 of the appellant for A.Y. 2015-16, however, it is seen that the 16, however, it is seen that the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2015 assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2015-16 has already been 16 has already been completed by the Assessing Officer on the basis of corrected balance completed by the Assessing Officer on the basis of corrected balance completed by the Assessing Officer on the basis of corrected balance sheet and the tax audit sheet and the tax audit report without rejecting the books of accounts report without rejecting the books of accounts for A. Y. 2015 for A. Y. 2015-16. Moreover, the assessee has explained the reasons 16. Moreover, the assessee has explained the reasons and circumstances for which the error was committed which was and circumstances for which the error was committed which was and circumstances for which the error was committed which was subsequently corrected while completing the tax audit and the subsequently corrected while completing the tax audit and the subsequently corrected while completing the tax audit and the Assessing Office Assessing Officer has not found any defect in the said explanation of r has not found any defect in the said explanation of the appellant either in the assessment proceeding or during the remand the appellant either in the assessment proceeding or during the remand the appellant either in the assessment proceeding or during the remand proceedings. Moreover, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer proceedings. Moreover, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer proceedings. Moreover, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has also not pointed out as to how the variation noted by him has also not pointed out as to how the variation noted by him has also not pointed out as to how the variation noted by him will adversely impact the taxable income for the year under consideration. adversely impact the taxable income for the year under consideration. adversely impact the taxable income for the year under consideration. Since the corrected balance Since the corrected balance-sheet for earlier year is finally adopted by sheet for earlier year is finally adopted by the appellant for working the cost of closing WIP, the error committed in the appellant for working the cost of closing WIP, the error committed in the appellant for working the cost of closing WIP, the error committed in first balance-sheet will not have sheet will not have any impact on the taxable income for any impact on the taxable income for the year under consideration. Moreover, the assessment for A. Y. 2015 the year under consideration. Moreover, the assessment for A. Y. 2015 the year under consideration. Moreover, the assessment for A. Y. 2015- 16 has already been completed both u/s 143(3) on 12/12/2017 as well 16 has already been completed both u/s 143(3) on 12/12/2017 as well 16 has already been completed both u/s 143(3) on 12/12/2017 as well as u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A dated 30/05/2022 and in none of the as u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A dated 30/05/2022 and in none of the as u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A dated 30/05/2022 and in none of the assessments, the A assessments, the Assessing Officer has made any addition on this ssessing Officer has made any addition on this account, therefore, in my opinion the observations of the Assessing account, therefore, in my opinion the observations of the Assessing account, therefore, in my opinion the observations of the Assessing Officer made regarding the revised balance Officer made regarding the revised balance-sheet for AY 2015 2015-16 are adequately clarified by the appellant and no adverse view on same adequately clarified by the appellant and no adverse view on same adequately clarified by the appellant and no adverse view on same should be taken for the year under consideration. be taken for the year under consideration.” 6.1 In view of perusal of the submission of the Assessing Officer in In view of perusal of the submission of the Assessing Officer in In view of perusal of the submission of the Assessing Officer in the remand report and finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the the remand report and finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the the remand report and finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Assessing Officer has not commented adversely on the explanation Assessing Officer has not commented adversely on the explanation Assessing Officer has not commented adversely on the explanation of the assessee regarding regarding variation amounting to Rs.5,98,16, amounting to Rs.5,98,16,000/- which was mutually adjusted against two items. The assessee has which was mutually adjusted against two items. The assessee has which was mutually adjusted against two items. The assessee has explained this variance because of particular one entry in respect of explained this variance because of particular one entry in respect of explained this variance because of particular one entry in respect of amount paid to ‘Ferreira family Ferreira family’ which was the reason of difference which was the reason of difference in two sets of the accounts. in two sets of the accounts. Moreover, this adju this adjustment doesn’t pertain to year under consideration and it was carried out in pertain to year under consideration and it was carried out in pertain to year under consideration and it was carried out in immediately preceding year, wherein the Assessing Officer accepted immediately preceding year, wherein the Assessing Officer accepted immediately preceding year, wherein the Assessing Officer accepted Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 17 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & the claim of the assessee. the claim of the assessee. In our opinion, once, the Assessing In our opinion, once, the Assessing Officer himself has not commented adversely in th Officer himself has not commented adversely in the remand report e remand report, we do not find any reason for agitating this issue by the Assessing we do not find any reason for agitating this issue by the Assessing we do not find any reason for agitating this issue by the Assessing Officer in the appeal filed before us Officer in the appeal filed before us unless any malafide in his unless any malafide in his action is brought before us. action is brought before us. Accordingly, we dismiss this ground of Accordingly, we dismiss this ground of the appeal of the Revenue. the appeal of the Revenue.
6.2 Further, in second part of the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Further, in second part of the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Further, in second part of the ground No. 1 of the appeal, the Revenue has contested the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) in Revenue has contested the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) i Revenue has contested the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) i respect of deduction of admin respect of deduction of admin expenses, selling and distribution expenses, selling and distribution, employee cost and other expenses in WIP of the projects namely cost and other expenses in WIP of the projects namely cost and other expenses in WIP of the projects namely ‘Skyline’ and ‘Aurum ‘Aurum-I’ out of revenue while computing the out of revenue while computing the profit/loss from those two projects. profit/loss from those two projects.
6.3 The Ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief of the amount of The Ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief of the amount of The Ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief of the amount of Rs.20,15,94,392/- observing as under: observing as under:
“28.5 There is no dispute that the expenses amounting to Rs. 20,15,9 28.5 There is no dispute that the expenses amounting to Rs. 20,15,9 28.5 There is no dispute that the expenses amounting to Rs. 20,15,9450 mot incurred by the appellant in earlier years are genuine expenses. It is mot incurred by the appellant in earlier years are genuine expenses. It is mot incurred by the appellant in earlier years are genuine expenses. It is also not under dispute that no deduction for these expenses have been also not under dispute that no deduction for these expenses have been also not under dispute that no deduction for these expenses have been claimed by the appellant or its predecessor company in any of the earlier claimed by the appellant or its predecessor company in any of the earlier claimed by the appellant or its predecessor company in any of the earlier assessment years. The appellant h assessment years. The appellant has argued that if the Assessing Officer as argued that if the Assessing Officer is of the view that these expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case is of the view that these expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case is of the view that these expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case he should have reworked the P/L Account of earlier assessment years and he should have reworked the P/L Account of earlier assessment years and he should have reworked the P/L Account of earlier assessment years and should have allowed corresponding losses of those years to be carry should have allowed corresponding losses of those years to be carry should have allowed corresponding losses of those years to be carry forward to present assessment year and to set orward to present assessment year and to set-off the income of present off the income of present year against such losses. I have considered this argument of the appellant year against such losses. I have considered this argument of the appellant year against such losses. I have considered this argument of the appellant and I am of the opinion that the genuine expenses incurred for the project and I am of the opinion that the genuine expenses incurred for the project and I am of the opinion that the genuine expenses incurred for the project and recorded in the books of accoun and recorded in the books of accounts, are eligible for deduction against ts, are eligible for deduction against the sale consideration especially when capitalization of such expenses in the sale consideration especially when capitalization of such expenses in the sale consideration especially when capitalization of such expenses in WIP has been allowed by the assessing officer in earlier years. The action WIP has been allowed by the assessing officer in earlier years. The action WIP has been allowed by the assessing officer in earlier years. The action of Assessing Officer of disturbing the opening WIP by excluding indi of Assessing Officer of disturbing the opening WIP by excluding indi of Assessing Officer of disturbing the opening WIP by excluding indirect expenses amounts to unsettling of already completed assessments u/s expenses amounts to unsettling of already completed assessments u/s expenses amounts to unsettling of already completed assessments u/s 143(3) of the Act without any meaningful gain because the whole exercise 143(3) of the Act without any meaningful gain because the whole exercise 143(3) of the Act without any meaningful gain because the whole exercise is revenue neutral. is revenue neutral.
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 18 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 28.6 The appellant has not claimed the indirect expenses under question The appellant has not claimed the indirect expenses under question The appellant has not claimed the indirect expenses under question twice but included twice but included the same in WIP every year. The disallowance of these The disallowance of these expenses in the year under consideration is unwarranted because it is not expenses in the year under consideration is unwarranted because it is not expenses in the year under consideration is unwarranted because it is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the appellant has claimed these the case of the Assessing Officer that the appellant has claimed these the case of the Assessing Officer that the appellant has claimed these expenses twice. In such a situation, not allowing deduct expenses twice. In such a situation, not allowing deduction for the genuine ion for the genuine expenses incurred by the appellant in any year would be against the expenses incurred by the appellant in any year would be against the expenses incurred by the appellant in any year would be against the principle of natural justice. If the Assessing Officer believed that these principle of natural justice. If the Assessing Officer believed that these principle of natural justice. If the Assessing Officer believed that these indirect expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case he should have indirect expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case he should have indirect expenses cannot be included in WIP, in that case he should have reduced the WIP by c reduced the WIP by corresponding amounts in each of earlier assessment orresponding amounts in each of earlier assessment years and should have allowed deduction for these genuine expenses in years and should have allowed deduction for these genuine expenses in years and should have allowed deduction for these genuine expenses in respective assessment years. respective assessment years.
In view of the above discussion, I am of considered opinion that action 29. In view of the above discussion, I am of considered opinion that action 29. In view of the above discussion, I am of considered opinion that action of the assessing officer in ac of the assessing officer in accepting the method of accounting in earlier cepting the method of accounting in earlier assessment years and allowing it to capitalize the indirect expenses in WIP assessment years and allowing it to capitalize the indirect expenses in WIP assessment years and allowing it to capitalize the indirect expenses in WIP in earlier years and then suddenly excluding the indirect expenses from in earlier years and then suddenly excluding the indirect expenses from in earlier years and then suddenly excluding the indirect expenses from the opening WIP in the year when the sales considerations are bo the opening WIP in the year when the sales considerations are bo the opening WIP in the year when the sales considerations are booked in the P/L Account, is against the principle of natural justice especially when the P/L Account, is against the principle of natural justice especially when the P/L Account, is against the principle of natural justice especially when genuineness of these expenses is not under doubt. The action of the genuineness of these expenses is not under doubt. The action of the genuineness of these expenses is not under doubt. The action of the assessing officer has resulted in not allowing deduction for genuine assessing officer has resulted in not allowing deduction for genuine assessing officer has resulted in not allowing deduction for genuine expenses in any of the assessment expenses in any of the assessment years which cannot be upheld. years which cannot be upheld. Therefore, considering the totality of facts of the case, I am of the opinion Therefore, considering the totality of facts of the case, I am of the opinion Therefore, considering the totality of facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the aggregate amount of Rs. 20,15,94,392/ that the aggregate amount of Rs. 20,15,94,392/- incurred towards incurred towards employees' cost, admin expenses, selling & distribution expenses and employees' cost, admin expenses, selling & distribution expenses and employees' cost, admin expenses, selling & distribution expenses and other expenses other expenses in earlier years cannot be excluded from the opening WIP in earlier years cannot be excluded from the opening WIP as on 01/04/2015 and therefore this addition is directed to be deleted. as on 01/04/2015 and therefore this addition is directed to be deleted. as on 01/04/2015 and therefore this addition is directed to be deleted.” 6.4 We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer held that relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer administrative expenses, employee cost etc. are allowable in the administrative expenses, employee cost etc. are allowable in the administrative expenses, employee cost etc. are allowable in the respective years of incurring of incurring and cannot be allowed in the and cannot be allowed in the assessment year under consideration. According to the Assessing assessment year under consideration. According to the Assessing assessment year under consideration. According to the Assessing Officer in percentage completion method, the profit proportionate to Officer in percentage completion method, the profit propor Officer in percentage completion method, the profit propor the stage of construction has to be recognized in respect of project the stage of construction has to be recognized in respect of project the stage of construction has to be recognized in respect of project but the employee cost but the employee cost, administrative expenses etc. are to be administrative expenses etc. are to be allowed in year in which in which same are incurred. But the contention of same are incurred. But the contention of the assessee that those expenses have not been c the assessee that those expenses have not been claimed in relevant laimed in relevant assessment years and same have been carried forward as work in assessment years and same have been carried forward as work in assessment years and same have been carried forward as work in progress to be reduced from the revenue or the sales at the time of progress to be reduced from the revenue or the sales at the time of progress to be reduced from the revenue or the sales at the time of Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 19 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & completion of the entire projects. completion of the entire projects. In our opinion, w In our opinion, whatever be the method of the assessee method of the assessee, whether project completion or percentage completion or percentage completion or a unique method, which is combination of both, but completion or a unique method, which is combination of both, but completion or a unique method, which is combination of both, but sane has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years and said has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years and said has been accepted by the Revenue in earlier years and said indirect expenses have been allowed to be carried forward as part of indirect expenses have been allowed to be carried forward as part of indirect expenses have been allowed to be carried forward as part of WIP. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned that assessee has has mentioned that assessee has not claimed those expens claimed those expenses in relevant assessment years. If that is es in relevant assessment years. If that is so, then in principle, those carried forward indirect expenses are to so, then in principle, those carried forward indirect expenses are to so, then in principle, those carried forward indirect expenses are to be allowed in the year of completion of project, b be allowed in the year of completion of project, but, from the details of indirect expenses filed by the assessee, penses filed by the assessee, it is not clear whether the it is not clear whether the administrative expenses administrative expenses, selling expenses, employee cost , employee cost and other expenses etc. carried forward to WIP of old projects pertain to carried forward to WIP of old projects pertain to carried forward to WIP of old projects pertain to projects initiated prior to March, 2012 projects initiated prior to March, 2012 or project commenced post project commenced post March, 2012. The administrative expenses, employee cost etc. in arch, 2012. The administrative expenses, employee cost etc. in arch, 2012. The administrative expenses, employee cost etc. in relation to two projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum-1 could relation to two projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum relation to two projects namely Skyline and Unique Aurum only be allowed to be carried forward as work in progress following only be allowed to be carried forward as work in progress following only be allowed to be carried forward as work in progress following the unique method of accounting of the assessee subject to same the unique method of accounting of the assessee subject to s the unique method of accounting of the assessee subject to s has not been claimed in earlier years. In the circumstances, we feel has not been claimed in earlier years. In the circumstances, we feel has not been claimed in earlier years. In the circumstances, we feel it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of the Assessing it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of the Assessing it appropriate to restore this issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of Officer for verification of total cost on account of administrative, on account of administrative, selling, employee cost selling, employee cost and other expenses and identify those nd identify those indirect expenses pertaining to the two projects nam pertaining to the two projects namely ‘Skyline’ pertaining to the two projects nam and ‘Unique Aurum-1 1’, incurred upto 31.03.2015, for to be added to for to be added to the closing WIP as on 31.03.2015. the closing WIP as on 31.03.2015. Further, we note from paper we note from paper book page 99 that the profit declared in ea book page 99 that the profit declared in earlier years also include rlier years also include Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 20 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & profit from sale of development profit from sale of development right certificates and interest, which certificates and interest, which can’t be added to WIP as profit of the old projects and consequently added to WIP as profit of the old projects and consequently added to WIP as profit of the old projects and consequently can’t be reduced from the revenue from the revenue in the year of completion of the in the year of completion of the project, as same is not part of profit from project. project, as same is not part of profit from project. The ground No. 1 The ground No. 1 of the Revenue is accordingly allowed partly for statistical purposes. of the Revenue is accordingly allowed partly for statistical purposes. of the Revenue is accordingly allowed partly for statistical purposes.
The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue relates to The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue relates to The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue relates to addition of Rs.2,62,1 ddition of Rs.2,62,17,851/- (sic) in relation to non ) in relation to non-recognition of the revenue pertaining to three the revenue pertaining to three new projects, which has been which has been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). deleted by the Ld. CIT(A).
7.1 The issue in dispute The issue in dispute involved in ground No. 2 No. 2 is that the Assessing Officer for the purpose of recognizing revenue from three Assessing Officer for the purpose of recognizing revenue Assessing Officer for the purpose of recognizing revenue projects namely ‘Unique Signature Unique Signature’, ‘Unique Aurum Unique Aurum-II’ and ‘Unique Homes’, under the under the ‘percentage completion method percentage completion method’, considered recognition of revenue from sale of flats at the stage of allotment of recognition of revenue from sale of flats at the stage of allotment of recognition of revenue from sale of flats at the stage of allotment of flats by the assessee, whereas , whereas the assessee recognised revenue ognised revenue from those flats at the stage when at the stage when registered sale agreement was entered agreement was entered into with the buyers. During appellate proceedings before the Ld. into with the buyers. During appellate proceedings before the Ld. into with the buyers. During appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) assessee made detailed submissions and relied upon various CIT(A) assessee made detailed submissions and relied upon various CIT(A) assessee made detailed submissions and relied upon various decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench. ordinate Bench. It is settled law law that under the ‘percentage completion method percentage completion method’ , the revenue should be recognised , the revenue should be recognised from the sale of the real estate, at t om the sale of the real estate, at the point when significant risk and reward of the ownership can be considered to and reward of the ownership can be considered to be be transferred to the buyers or otherwise otherwise when the seller enter into an agreement into an agreement with the buyers, which has effect of transferring legal title of the which has effect of transferring legal title of the which has effect of transferring legal title of the Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 21 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & ownership to the buyer provided that the agreement is legally ownership to the buyer provided that the agreement is legally ownership to the buyer provided that the agreement is legally enforceable although possession of the real estate unit may not enforceable although possession of the real estate unit enforceable although possession of the real estate unit have been given. In the decisions cited by the assessee before the iven. In the decisions cited by the assessee before the iven. In the decisions cited by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), it is held that significant risk and reward it is held that significant risk and reward it is held that significant risk and reward are transferred only in the event of registration of real estate property with the only in the event of registration of real estate property with the only in the event of registration of real estate property with the stamp duty authority and not at the stage of issue of allotment stamp duty authority and not at the stage of issue of allotme stamp duty authority and not at the stage of issue of allotme letter by the developer against certain payments. Following the letter by the developer against certain payments. Following the letter by the developer against certain payments. Following the decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench, the Ld. CIT(A) verified all the ordinate Bench, the Ld. CIT(A) verified all the ordinate Bench, the Ld. CIT(A) verified all the sales agreement and allotment letters and correspondingly observed allotment letters and correspondingly observed that in some cases registered agreement that in some cases registered agreement were entered i entered into, however the assessee did not consider the same f the assessee did not consider the same for the purpose for or the purpose for recognizing revenue. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly sustained the recognizing revenue. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly sustained the recognizing revenue. The Ld. CIT(A) accordingly sustained the addition to the extent of Rs.6, addition to the extent of Rs.6,23,553/- out of addition made by the out of addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.2,62,17,851/ Assessing Officer of Rs.2,62,17,851/-. The relevant fi . The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:
Findings 43. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by 43. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by 43. I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appellant from time to time. The issue under dispute is regarding the the appellant from time to time. The issue under dispute is regarding the the appellant from time to time. The issue under dispute is regarding the incorrect recognition of revenue from the projects na incorrect recognition of revenue from the projects namely Unique Aurum mely Unique Aurum-lI, Unique Signature and Unique Homes. Since all these three projects are Unique Signature and Unique Homes. Since all these three projects are Unique Signature and Unique Homes. Since all these three projects are separate and are at different stages of development, therefore, it will be separate and are at different stages of development, therefore, it will be separate and are at different stages of development, therefore, it will be appropriate if the issues involved in each of these projects are dealt appropriate if the issues involved in each of these projects are dealt appropriate if the issues involved in each of these projects are dealt separately. Unique Aurum Aurum-II 44. There is no dispute that 25.24% of the project was completed during 44. There is no dispute that 25.24% of the project was completed during 44. There is no dispute that 25.24% of the project was completed during the year and accordingly, the appellant recognized the revenue to the the year and accordingly, the appellant recognized the revenue to the the year and accordingly, the appellant recognized the revenue to the extent of 25% of the total sale consideration for the flats for which, sale extent of 25% of the total sale consideration for the flats for which, sale extent of 25% of the total sale consideration for the flats for which, sale agreements were registered. agreements were registered. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the The Assessing Officer did not agree with the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the customers. Thus, the dispute is regarding the point at which the revenues customers. Thus, the dispute is regarding the point at which the revenues customers. Thus, the dispute is regarding the point at which the revenues is to be recognized for a particular flat. As per the appellant, the is to be recognized for a particular flat. As per the appellant, the is to be recognized for a particular flat. As per the appellant, the date of Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 22 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & registration of sale agreement should be considered, however, the registration of sale agreement should be considered, however, the registration of sale agreement should be considered, however, the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the execution or registration of sale Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the execution or registration of sale Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the execution or registration of sale agreement does not matter while recognizing the revenue as per AS agreement does not matter while recognizing the revenue as per AS agreement does not matter while recognizing the revenue as per AS-7 of Accounting Standards laid down Accounting Standards laid down by ICAl. The Assessing Officer is of the by ICAl. The Assessing Officer is of the view that whenever, all critical approvals for the project are in place, 25% view that whenever, all critical approvals for the project are in place, 25% view that whenever, all critical approvals for the project are in place, 25% of project is completed and at least 25% of saleable project area is booked, of project is completed and at least 25% of saleable project area is booked, of project is completed and at least 25% of saleable project area is booked, in such situations, the revenue on those flats in which 10% o in such situations, the revenue on those flats in which 10% o in such situations, the revenue on those flats in which 10% of sale value is realized, should be recognized. The Assessing Officer also considered the realized, should be recognized. The Assessing Officer also considered the realized, should be recognized. The Assessing Officer also considered the booking application/allotment letter as valid contract and has held that booking application/allotment letter as valid contract and has held that booking application/allotment letter as valid contract and has held that these are legally enforceable documents. Thus, although the appellant has these are legally enforceable documents. Thus, although the appellant has these are legally enforceable documents. Thus, although the appellant has recognized revenue recognized revenue amounting to Rs. 5,01,50,250/- (25% of Rs. 20,06,01,000/- -) which is corresponding to the flats for which sale ) which is corresponding to the flats for which sale agreement were registered before 31/03/2016, the Assessing Officer agreement were registered before 31/03/2016, the Assessing Officer agreement were registered before 31/03/2016, the Assessing Officer recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the customers. In this recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the customers. In this recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the customers. In this manner, the Assessing Officer has recognized the revenue to the extent of he Assessing Officer has recognized the revenue to the extent of he Assessing Officer has recognized the revenue to the extent of Rs. 8,87,06,935/ Rs. 8,87,06,935/- (25.24% of sale value of Rs. 35, 14,30,000/ (25.24% of sale value of Rs. 35, 14,30,000/- for all flats).
On the other hand, the appellant has submitted that Accounting 45. On the other hand, the appellant has submitted that Accounting 45. On the other hand, the appellant has submitted that Accounting Standard AS-7 is to be read along with Accoun 7 is to be read along with Accounting Standard AS ting Standard AS-9 because para 3.3 of AS para 3.3 of AS-7 clearly provides that revenue is to recognized when the 7 clearly provides that revenue is to recognized when the conditions specified in paragraph 10 & 11 of AS conditions specified in paragraph 10 & 11 of AS-9 are fulfilled. As per AS 9 are fulfilled. As per AS- 9, one of the most important requirements is transfer of all significant risks 9, one of the most important requirements is transfer of all significant risks 9, one of the most important requirements is transfer of all significant risks and reward of d reward of ownership' which is required to be determined on the basis ownership' which is required to be determined on the basis of terms and conditions of the agreement for sale. As per para 3.3 of AS of terms and conditions of the agreement for sale. As per para 3.3 of AS of terms and conditions of the agreement for sale. As per para 3.3 of AS-7, this agreement for sale is considered of having the effect of transferring all this agreement for sale is considered of having the effect of transferring all this agreement for sale is considered of having the effect of transferring all significant risk and reward of significant risk and reward of ownership to the buyer, provided the ownership to the buyer, provided the agreement is legally enforceable. The AS agreement is legally enforceable. The AS-7 further provides that once such 7 further provides that once such legally enforceable agreement is entered with the buyer, the revenue is to legally enforceable agreement is entered with the buyer, the revenue is to legally enforceable agreement is entered with the buyer, the revenue is to recognized subject to fulfillment of other conditions, irrespective recognized subject to fulfillment of other conditions, irrespective recognized subject to fulfillment of other conditions, irrespective of the fact whether legal title is transferred or not or possession is given or not. So, whether legal title is transferred or not or possession is given or not. So, whether legal title is transferred or not or possession is given or not. So, one of the important conditions is presence of a legally enforceable one of the important conditions is presence of a legally enforceable one of the important conditions is presence of a legally enforceable agreement to sell. agreement to sell. 46.1 The appellant has contended that Assessing Officer has erroneously 46.1 The appellant has contended that Assessing Officer has erroneously 46.1 The appellant has contended that Assessing Officer has erroneously considered the booking form as letter of acceptance and has equated the red the booking form as letter of acceptance and has equated the red the booking form as letter of acceptance and has equated the same to an enforceable contract/agreement to sell. A perusal of specimen same to an enforceable contract/agreement to sell. A perusal of specimen same to an enforceable contract/agreement to sell. A perusal of specimen booking form filed before the Assessing Officer suggests that this is an booking form filed before the Assessing Officer suggests that this is an booking form filed before the Assessing Officer suggests that this is an application form by the buyer to the appellan application form by the buyer to the appellant wherein, the buyer had t wherein, the buyer had agreed to book a specific flat for a specified consideration. Clause 11 of agreed to book a specific flat for a specified consideration. Clause 11 of agreed to book a specific flat for a specified consideration. Clause 11 of this form reads as under: this form reads as under:- "11. I/We have clearly understood that this application does not "11. I/We have clearly understood that this application does not "11. I/We have clearly understood that this application does not constitute an agreement to sell and I/We do not become entitled constitute an agreement to sell and I/We do not become entitled constitute an agreement to sell and I/We do not become entitled to the provisional allotment of a residential flat notwithstanding the the provisional allotment of a residential flat notwithstanding the the provisional allotment of a residential flat notwithstanding the fact fact fact that that that the the the company company company may may may have have have issued issued issued a a a receipt receipt receipt in in in acknowledgement of the money tendered with this application. acknowledgement of the money tendered with this application. acknowledgement of the money tendered with this application. I/We undertake to execute the agreement. Allotment letter on the I/We undertake to execute the agreement. Allotment letter on the I/We undertake to execute the agreement. Allotment letter on the company' company's standard format agreeing to abide & agree by the terms s standard format agreeing to abide & agree by the terms and condition of the same. I and condition of the same. I/We agree to abide by the terms and We agree to abide by the terms and conditions of this application and of allotment letter." conditions of this application and of allotment letter." conditions of this application and of allotment letter."
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 23 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 46.2 Thus, the clause 11 clearly provides that this is a booking Thus, the clause 11 clearly provides that this is a booking application Thus, the clause 11 clearly provides that this is a booking and it does not constitute an agreement to sell. It has also been clearly nd it does not constitute an agreement to sell. It has also been clearly nd it does not constitute an agreement to sell. It has also been clearly mentioned that through this application, the proposed buyer does not mentioned that through this application, the proposed buyer does not mentioned that through this application, the proposed buyer does not become entitled to provisional allotment of the said residential flat. Also, become entitled to provisional allotment of the said residential flat. Also, become entitled to provisional allotment of the said residential flat. Also, this application cannot be considered this application cannot be considered as allotment letter because it is as allotment letter because it is clearly provided in clause 11 that the allotment letter on the company's clearly provided in clause 11 that the allotment letter on the company's clearly provided in clause 11 that the allotment letter on the company's standard format shall be executed separately. standard format shall be executed separately. 46.3 I have also perused the specimen allotment letter filed by the 46.3 I have also perused the specimen allotment letter filed by the 46.3 I have also perused the specimen allotment letter filed by the appellant. The clause The clause-10 and clause-13 of this allotment letter read as 13 of this allotment letter read as under:- "10. Detailed terms and conditions of sale shall be incorporated in "10. Detailed terms and conditions of sale shall be incorporated in "10. Detailed terms and conditions of sale shall be incorporated in a standard agreement for sale, copy whereof, shall be handed over a standard agreement for sale, copy whereof, shall be handed over a standard agreement for sale, copy whereof, shall be handed over to you in due course. The agreement for sale will inter to you in due course. The agreement for sale will inter to you in due course. The agreement for sale will inter-alla includes conditions/covenants not limiting to... onditions/covenants not limiting to...
This writing is merely a letter of intent and is not and does not 13. This writing is merely a letter of intent and is not and does not 13. This writing is merely a letter of intent and is not and does not purport to be an agreement for sale/purchase of the said flat. Your purport to be an agreement for sale/purchase of the said flat. Your purport to be an agreement for sale/purchase of the said flat. Your rights shall become effective only on execution of the agreement for rights shall become effective only on execution of the agreement for rights shall become effective only on execution of the agreement for sale thoug sale though your obligation to pay the consideration amount as per h your obligation to pay the consideration amount as per Annexure "A" shall be liable to be discharged, irrespective of Annexure "A" shall be liable to be discharged, irrespective of Annexure "A" shall be liable to be discharged, irrespective of whether the agreement for sale has been executed or not." whether the agreement for sale has been executed or not." whether the agreement for sale has been executed or not." 46.4 Thus clause Thus clause-13 of the allotment letter clearly provides that the 13 of the allotment letter clearly provides that the allotment letter should not be considered as agreement for sale. It further t letter should not be considered as agreement for sale. It further t letter should not be considered as agreement for sale. It further provides that the buyer's right shall become effective only on execution of provides that the buyer's right shall become effective only on execution of provides that the buyer's right shall become effective only on execution of the agreement for sale. the agreement for sale.
As discussed earlier in this order, that as per AS 47. As discussed earlier in this order, that as per AS-7 read with AS 7 read with AS-9, revenue is requ revenue is required to be recognized on those projects, where at least 10% ired to be recognized on those projects, where at least 10% of the total revenue as per the agreements of sale or any other legally of the total revenue as per the agreements of sale or any other legally of the total revenue as per the agreements of sale or any other legally enforceable documents are realized. In the present case, the booking form enforceable documents are realized. In the present case, the booking form enforceable documents are realized. In the present case, the booking form as well as the allotment letter clearly provides t as well as the allotment letter clearly provides that buyer's rights are not hat buyer's rights are not effective unless agreement for sale is executed. effective unless agreement for sale is executed. Thus, it cannot be said that Thus, it cannot be said that all significant risk and reward of ownership have been transferred to the significant risk and reward of ownership have been transferred to the significant risk and reward of ownership have been transferred to the buyer. Therefore, the booking letter as well as allotment letter cannot be Therefore, the booking letter as well as allotment letter cannot be Therefore, the booking letter as well as allotment letter cannot be said to be a legally enforceable agreement to sale. id to be a legally enforceable agreement to sale.
It may also be mentioned that a similar issue has been considered It may also be mentioned that a similar issue has been considered It may also be mentioned that a similar issue has been considered by the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of M/s Shankala Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs. the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of M/s Shankala Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs. the Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of M/s Shankala Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO dated 28/8/2019. Shankala Realtors ITO ITA No.3827/MUM/2017 dated 28/8/2019. Shankala Realtors ITO ITA No.3827/MUM/2017 dated 28/8/2019. Shankala Realtors was in the business of real estate development and was following the percentage the business of real estate development and was following the percentage the business of real estate development and was following the percentage completion method and offered the income only in respect of those flats for completion method and offered the income only in respect of those flats for completion method and offered the income only in respect of those flats for which agreements were registered. The Assessing Officer observed that in which agreements were registered. The Assessing Officer observed that in which agreements were registered. The Assessing Officer observed that in many cases, the assessee ha many cases, the assessee had received considerable portion of advance, d received considerable portion of advance, still it had not offered the income for taxation on the pretext that no still it had not offered the income for taxation on the pretext that no still it had not offered the income for taxation on the pretext that no agreement has been made with the prospective buyer. The Assessing agreement has been made with the prospective buyer. The Assessing agreement has been made with the prospective buyer. The Assessing Officer after considering the AS Officer after considering the AS-9 noted that when a prospective buyer 9 noted that when a prospective buyer approached the appellant, allotment letter is issued on receipt of advance roached the appellant, allotment letter is issued on receipt of advance roached the appellant, allotment letter is issued on receipt of advance money and in some cases, the assessee has taken almost 90% of the total money and in some cases, the assessee has taken almost 90% of the total money and in some cases, the assessee has taken almost 90% of the total Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 24 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & value. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer held that entering into an value. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer held that entering into an value. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer held that entering into an agreement and its registration is not neces agreement and its registration is not necessary for recognition of revenue sary for recognition of revenue on advances and worked out the profit. on advances and worked out the profit. The Ld. CIT(A), agreed with the The Ld. CIT(A), agreed with the reasons given by the Assessing Officer and upheld the addition. When reasons given by the Assessing Officer and upheld the addition. When reasons given by the Assessing Officer and upheld the addition. When matter reached to Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai, the Bench observed as under: matter reached to Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai, the Bench observed as under: matter reached to Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai, the Bench observed as under: "7.3 In the inst In the instant case as recorded by the AO when a prospective as recorded by the AO when a prospective buyer approaches the assessee for booking the fat, allotment letter approaches the assessee for booking the fat, allotment letter approaches the assessee for booking the fat, allotment letter is issued to the buyer is issued to the buyer on receipt of the advance money. on receipt of the advance money. The appellant filed a written submission dated 26.03.2015 before The appellant filed a written submission dated 26.03.2015 before The appellant filed a written submission dated 26.03.2015 before the AO stating th the AO stating that the degree of work completed and certified by at the degree of work completed and certified by architect till 31.03.2009 is 73% and the assessee architect till 31.03.2009 is 73% and the assessee architect till 31.03.2009 is 73% and the assessee-company has recognized the revenue by applying 73% to the value of agreements recognized the revenue by applying 73% to the value of agreements recognized the revenue by applying 73% to the value of agreements executed till 31.03.2009. It was further stated before the AO that executed till 31.03.2009. It was further stated before the AO that executed till 31.03.2009. It was further stated before the AO that the revenue the revenue in respect of balance advances could not be recognized in respect of balance advances could not be recognized as passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an as passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an as passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an essential condition for revenue recognition as per AS essential condition for revenue recognition as per AS essential condition for revenue recognition as per AS-9, which has not been fulfilled in the instant case, as no agreement is executed not been fulfilled in the instant case, as no agreement is executed not been fulfilled in the instant case, as no agreement is executed and no possession have been given to the buyer. o possession have been given to the buyer. The case laws relied on by the Ld. counsel and Ld. DR have been The case laws relied on by the Ld. counsel and Ld. DR have been The case laws relied on by the Ld. counsel and Ld. DR have been narrated at length hereinbefore. One principle which emerges from narrated at length hereinbefore. One principle which emerges from narrated at length hereinbefore. One principle which emerges from the above case laws is the role of agreement executed. Immovable the above case laws is the role of agreement executed. Immovable the above case laws is the role of agreement executed. Immovable property is not co property is not conveyed by delivery of possession, but by a duly nveyed by delivery of possession, but by a duly registered deed. Further, it is the date of execution of registered registered deed. Further, it is the date of execution of registered registered deed. Further, it is the date of execution of registered document, document, not the date of delivery of possession or the date of not the date of delivery of possession or the date of registration of document which is relevant. Once the executed registration of document which is relevant. Once the executed registration of document which is relevant. Once the executed documents are documents are registered, the transfer will take place on the date registered, the transfer will take place on the date of execution of documents and not on the date of registration of of execution of documents and not on the date of registration of of execution of documents and not on the date of registration of documents as held in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT documents as held in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT documents as held in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC). 185 (SC). As per the ingredients of AS As per the ingredients of AS-7 and AS-9, 'revenue' be recognized 9, 'revenue' be recognized even though legal title of the property is not transferred and even though legal title of the property is not transferred and even though legal title of the property is not transferred and possession is not given. Once seller transfers significant risks and possession is not given. Once seller transfers significant risks and possession is not given. Once seller transfers significant risks and rewards of ownership to buyer, seller thereafter acts like a rewards of ownership to buyer, seller thereafter acts like a rewards of ownership to buyer, seller thereafter acts like a contractor. Accordingly, revenue recognition will have to be a contractor. Accordingly, revenue recognition will have to be a contractor. Accordingly, revenue recognition will have to be as in Percentage Completion Method' (AS Percentage Completion Method' (AS-7). We are concerned here with the execution of agreements and not We are concerned here with the execution of agreements and not We are concerned here with the execution of agreements and not with the registration of agreements. with the registration of agreements. Having considered the application of principles of AS Having considered the application of principles of AS Having considered the application of principles of AS-9 in respect of sale of goods to a real estate project and sale of goods to a real estate project and the case laws relied on by the case laws relied on by both sides in the back drop of the facts of the case, we set aside both sides in the back drop of the facts of the case, we set aside both sides in the back drop of the facts of the case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO to make an addition, bringing to tax by percentage completion AO to make an addition, bringing to tax by percentage completion AO to make an addition, bringing to tax by percentage completion method, the revenue out of method, the revenue out of the remaining executed agreements, if the remaining executed agreements, if any, during the impugned assessment year. The assessee is any, during the impugned assessment year. The assessee is any, during the impugned assessment year. The assessee is directed to file the documents/evidence in respect of agreements directed to file the documents/evidence in respect of agreements directed to file the documents/evidence in respect of agreements Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 25 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & executed during the impugned assessment year. Needless to say, executed during the impugned assessment year. Needless to say, executed during the impugned assessment year. Needless to say, the AO would provide reasonable the AO would provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the opportunity of being heard to the assessee before finalizing the order." assessee before finalizing the order."
Thus, in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the jurisdictional ITAT 49. Thus, in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the jurisdictional ITAT 49. Thus, in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the jurisdictional ITAT after considering AS after considering AS-7 and AS-9 has held that while applying the 9 has held that while applying the percentage completion method, the date of completion method, the date of execution of 'agreement to sell' execution of 'agreement to sell' is the point Which determines the point of recognition of revenue because is the point Which determines the point of recognition of revenue because is the point Which determines the point of recognition of revenue because passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an essential passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an essential passing of risks and rewards by virtue of ownership is an essential condition for revenue recognition. The Hon'ble ITAT has further held that it condition for revenue recognition. The Hon'ble ITAT has further held that it condition for revenue recognition. The Hon'ble ITAT has further held that it is the date of execution of agreement which is important and not the date he date of execution of agreement which is important and not the date he date of execution of agreement which is important and not the date of registration of agreement, as canvassed by the assessee. Accordingly, of registration of agreement, as canvassed by the assessee. Accordingly, of registration of agreement, as canvassed by the assessee. Accordingly, the ITAT directed the assessing officer to bring to tax, the revenue out of the ITAT directed the assessing officer to bring to tax, the revenue out of the ITAT directed the assessing officer to bring to tax, the revenue out of the remaining executed agreements, if the remaining executed agreements, if any, during the impugned any, during the impugned assessment year, by applying the percentage completion method. It is seen assessment year, by applying the percentage completion method. It is seen assessment year, by applying the percentage completion method. It is seen that the facts of the present case are similar to the case of Shankala that the facts of the present case are similar to the case of Shankala that the facts of the present case are similar to the case of Shankala Realtors (supra). Realtors (supra).
An identical issue was raised by the Assessing Officer in the c 50. An identical issue was raised by the Assessing Officer in the c 50. An identical issue was raised by the Assessing Officer in the case of a group concern namely M/s Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP group concern namely M/s Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP group concern namely M/s Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP wherein similar additions were made by the Assessing Officer while wherein similar additions were made by the Assessing Officer while wherein similar additions were made by the Assessing Officer while completing assessment for A.Y. 2016 completing assessment for A.Y. 2016-17. The said issue was decided in 17. The said issue was decided in favour of the tax payer by CIT(A). Against the favour of the tax payer by CIT(A). Against the said order, the revenue filed the revenue filed an appeal before an appeal before Hon. ITAT in ITA No. 1733/Mum/2022. Vide order dated Hon. ITAT in ITA No. 1733/Mum/2022. Vide order dated 24/11/2022, the Hon. 24/11/2022, the Hon. ITAT has dismissed the revenue's appeal by ITAT has dismissed the revenue's appeal by observing as under: observing as under:- "12. Aforesaid findings returned by the Ld. CIT(A) need no "12. Aforesaid findings returned by the Ld. CIT(A) need no "12. Aforesaid findings returned by the Ld. CIT(A) need no interference interference on the grounds inter-alia that the entire revenue has alia that the entire revenue has been recognized by the assessee as per accepted percentage been recognized by the assessee as per accepted percentage been recognized by the assessee as per accepted percentage completion method; that the flats for which no doubt assessee has completion method; that the flats for which no doubt assessee has completion method; that the flats for which no doubt assessee has received more than 10% of the sale consideration but cannot be received more than 10% of the sale consideration but cannot be received more than 10% of the sale consideration but cannot be taken for rev taken for revenue recognition because enforceable contract qua all enue recognition because enforceable contract qua all sale consideration, the revenue cannot be recognized for taxing the sale consideration, the revenue cannot be recognized for taxing the sale consideration, the revenue cannot be recognized for taxing the income; that moreover the Ld. CIT(A) has returned factual findings income; that moreover the Ld. CIT(A) has returned factual findings income; that moreover the Ld. CIT(A) has returned factual findings that there is no flat for which revenue is required to be recognize that there is no flat for which revenue is required to be recognize that there is no flat for which revenue is required to be recognized over and above the revenue recognized in the books of account over and above the revenue recognized in the books of account over and above the revenue recognized in the books of account and; that moreover the assessee has already offered the and; that moreover the assessee has already offered the and; that moreover the assessee has already offered the corresponding revenue in the subsequent years for A.Y. 2017 corresponding revenue in the subsequent years for A.Y. 2017 corresponding revenue in the subsequent years for A.Y. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019 19 and 2019-20." Since, the issue under consideration stands decide Since, the issue under consideration stands decided by Jurisdictional ITAT d by Jurisdictional ITAT in assessee's favour in the case of sister concern of the appellant, it is in assessee's favour in the case of sister concern of the appellant, it is in assessee's favour in the case of sister concern of the appellant, it is incumbent upon me to follow the said decision. incumbent upon me to follow the said decision.
One of the contentions of the appellant is that even though it is 51. One of the contentions of the appellant is that even though it is 51. One of the contentions of the appellant is that even though it is following the consistent policy regardi following the consistent policy regarding the recognition of revenue, the ng the recognition of revenue, the Assessing Officer has been inconsistent in this regard. A perusal of the Assessing Officer has been inconsistent in this regard. A perusal of the Assessing Officer has been inconsistent in this regard. A perusal of the assessment order for A.Y. 2017 assessment order for A.Y. 2017-18 suggests that while completing the 18 suggests that while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer did not stick to the accounting policy assessment, the Assessing Officer did not stick to the accounting policy assessment, the Assessing Officer did not stick to the accounting policy adopted by him for A.Y. d by him for A.Y. 2016-17 (assessment year under consideration) 17 (assessment year under consideration)
Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 26 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & and accepted the revenue recognized by the appellant in the P/L Account and accepted the revenue recognized by the appellant in the P/L Account and accepted the revenue recognized by the appellant in the P/L Account and no addition was made on this issue in A.Y. 2017 and no addition was made on this issue in A.Y. 2017-18 while completing 18 while completing assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act or any other su assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act or any other subsequent assessment bsequent assessment years. The copies of assessment orders for A.Ys. 2017 years. The copies of assessment orders for A.Ys. 2017-18, 2018 18, 2018-19, 2019- 20, 2020-21 and 2021 21 and 2021-22 completed u/s 143(3)/143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the 22 completed u/s 143(3)/143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act have also been filed. Thus, the contention of the appellant that the Act have also been filed. Thus, the contention of the appellant that the Act have also been filed. Thus, the contention of the appellant that the Assessing Officer ha Assessing Officer has not been consistent in the method adopted by him, s not been consistent in the method adopted by him, has merits.
Another contention of the appellant is that the method of revenue 52. Another contention of the appellant is that the method of revenue 52. Another contention of the appellant is that the method of revenue recognition adopted by the Assessing Officer has resulted in pre recognition adopted by the Assessing Officer has resulted in pre recognition adopted by the Assessing Officer has resulted in pre-ponment of the revenue from subsequent assessment years t of the revenue from subsequent assessment years to the assessment year o the assessment year under consideration. It has been submitted that by following the under consideration. It has been submitted that by following the under consideration. It has been submitted that by following the accounting policy, the appellant itself has recognized revenue in accounting policy, the appellant itself has recognized revenue in accounting policy, the appellant itself has recognized revenue in subsequent assessment years. subsequent assessment years. As a result, same revenue and same As a result, same revenue and same income stands taxed in two assessment y income stands taxed in two assessment years resulting in double taxation. ears resulting in double taxation. A chart giving the year A chart giving the year-wise details in which the said revenue was wise details in which the said revenue was recognized for each of three projects along with corresponding audited recognized for each of three projects along with corresponding audited recognized for each of three projects along with corresponding audited financial statements have been filed by the appellant. financial statements have been filed by the appellant. The consolidated The consolidated amount is tabulated as under for all the three projects: abulated as under for all the three projects: Sale recognized in P/L Account A.Y.
Unique Aurum-ll (UA- -II) Unique Signature (US) Unique Homes (UH) Unique Homes (UH)
Total revenue Additional Additional Total Additional Total Additional Revenue from UA-II Revenue Revenue revenue from Revenue revenue from from those UH flats from those from those US from those US UH on which AO UA- -II flats on flats on which recognized revenue which AO which AO AO recognized during recognized recognized revenue during AY 16-1 7 revenue revenue AY 16-1 7 during during AY16-17 AY16 2017-18 9,05,68,000 2,59,78,000 2,59,78,000 18,52,13,797 3,63,92,298 1,25,57,611 1,25,57,611 2018-19 24,91,24,920 9,42,43,020 9,42,43,020 18,40,64,001 5,37,79,842 37,05,701 37,05,701 2019-20 24,87,10,330 2,62,47,980 2,62,47,980 4,05,02,487 51,76,837 5,58,85,358 1,90,47,108 2020-21 2,27,74,000 13,60,000 13,60,000 7,89.25,340 1,94,13,138 11,37,38,423 5,40,77,819 2020-21 - - 9,40,74,339 1,42,36,298 2,49,94,074 78,87,212 Total 52,96,77,250 15,08,29,000 58,27,79,964 12,89,98,410 15,08,29,000 21,08,81,167 13,15,90,350 The above chart suggests that the appellant has offered the corresponding The above chart suggests that the appellant has offered the corresponding The above chart suggests that the appellant has offered the corresponding revenues in subsequent assessment years i.e. A. Ys. 2017 revenues in subsequent assessment years i.e. A. Ys. 2017 revenues in subsequent assessment years i.e. A. Ys. 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020- 20, 2020-21 and 2021-22.
Considering the totality of facts of the case and the decisions 53. Considering the totality of facts of the case and the decisions 53. Considering the totality of facts of the case and the decisions of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) and M/s jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) and M/s jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) and M/s Unique Shanti Neminath LLP (supra), I am of the opinion that the assessing Unique Shanti Neminath LLP (supra), I am of the opinion that the assessing Unique Shanti Neminath LLP (supra), I am of the opinion that the assessing officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats ignoring the fact officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats ignoring the fact officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats ignoring the fact that in many cases, there w that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable agreement in the as no legally enforceable agreement in the form of agreement to sell. In the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), Hon'ble form of agreement to sell. In the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), Hon'ble form of agreement to sell. In the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), Hon'ble ITAT has held that revenue is required to be recognized at the time of ITAT has held that revenue is required to be recognized at the time of ITAT has held that revenue is required to be recognized at the time of Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 27 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & execution of agreements and the date of registration of agreement execution of agreements and the date of registration of agreement execution of agreements and the date of registration of agreements is immaterial. Accordingly, the Hon'ble ITAT had directed to bring to tax the immaterial. Accordingly, the Hon'ble ITAT had directed to bring to tax the immaterial. Accordingly, the Hon'ble ITAT had directed to bring to tax the revenue out of the agreements which were executed but remained to be revenue out of the agreements which were executed but remained to be revenue out of the agreements which were executed but remained to be registered. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has considered the registered. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has considered the registered. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has considered the total sale for Unique Aurum total sale for Unique Aurum-ll till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 35,14,30,000/ ll 31/03/2016 at Rs. 35,14,30,000/-. Against this amount, the assessee has considered the sale value at Rs. Against this amount, the assessee has considered the sale value at Rs. Against this amount, the assessee has considered the sale value at Rs. 20,06,01,000/- - for the purpose of computation of profit as per ICAl for the purpose of computation of profit as per ICAl guidelines 2012. The appellant has submitted complete details of guidelines 2012. The appellant has submitted complete details of guidelines 2012. The appellant has submitted complete details of remaining flats remaining flats having sale value of Rs. 15,08,29,000/- such as date of such as date of booking, date of agreement and year of revenue recognized in respect of booking, date of agreement and year of revenue recognized in respect of booking, date of agreement and year of revenue recognized in respect of the flats for which no revenue was recognized during the year under the flats for which no revenue was recognized during the year under the flats for which no revenue was recognized during the year under consideration even though the flats were booked by the cust consideration even though the flats were booked by the cust consideration even though the flats were booked by the customers. The said details are as under: said details are as under: |Statement of Flats Flats Booked before 3103.2016 but Revenue ue recognized In subsequent years years as per Percentage Completion on the basis of date of Completion on the basis of date of agreement Flat Name Agreement Date of Date of Revenue Recognition Revenue Recognition No. Value Booking Agreemen t A.Y2017- A.Y.2018- - A.Y.2019- A.Y.2020-21 18 19 20 Unique Aurum-II 203 Ritesh Gangwal & Jt. 28,80,000 08.09.11 14.08,18 23,61,60 5,18,400 205 Hemlata R. Singh & Jt. 49,05,000 10,04.14 20,06.19 40,22,100 0 8,82,900 208 Rachika Samaiya & Jt. 28,80,000 31.07.12 06.09.17 14,40,000 9,21,600 5,18,400 301 Prakash S Gadade & Jt 47,00,000 17.02.14 09.08.18 - 38,54,000 8,46,000 38,54,000 302 Nalin Chandra Pant 43,60,000 14.02.12 28.08.18 - 35,75,200 0 7,84,800 303 Bhamini J. Thakkar & Jt 28,80,000 31.07.12 28.05.18 - 23,61,600 5,18,400 23,61,600 401 Anil Fernandes 43,60,000 27.12.12 26.07.17 21,80,000 13,95,200 00 7,S4,800 402 Vandana Tiwari & Jt. 43,60,000 01.11.12 24.04.17 26.07.17 13,95,200 0 7,84,800 508 Dinesha Achuita Shetty 30,24,000 10.08.13 29.11.18 - 24,79,680 5,44,320 24,79,680 602 Gupta Vishal & J 54,50,000 30.10.15 14.12,18 - 44,69,000 9,81,000 44,69,000 708 Jugal C. Mascarenhas 32,80,000 17.02.14 20.06.14 16,40,000 10,43,600 10,43,600 5,90,400 902 Rajani B. Ranchooddas 43,60,000 07.08.12 06.11.17 - 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 904 Rambha Rakesh Singh 28,80,000 21.01.13 21.12.16 14,40,000 9,21,600 5,18,400 1003 Ajay Kumar Pandey & Jt. 36,00,000 03.11.13 18.08.18 - 29,52,000 6,48,000 29,52,000 1006 Nitin Palan & Jt. 43,60,000 27.06,17 29.06,17 - 35,75,200 0 7,84,800 1008 Sanjay Kulshrestha & Jt. 30,00,000 05.05.13 13.09.17 15,00,000 9,60,000 5,40,000 1104 Sheela R. Kalokh 29,54,000 13.09.13 23.12.14 15,48,000 9,90,720 4,15,280 1105 Rukmani J. Nadar 43,60,000 25.07.11 12.12.18 - 43,60,000 1201 Amit Jha & Jt 43,60,000 08.06.12 21.03.17 21,80,000 13,95,200 00 7,84,800 1202 Amit Jha & Jt. 43,60,000 08.06.12 21.03,17 21,80,000 13,95,200 13,95,200 7,84,800 1205 Mr. Amit Saha & Jt. 53,30,000 17.04.15 07,03,18 - 43,70,600 9,59,400 43,70,600 1206 Deepati R. Jaiswal & JT 49,50,000 01.10.15 31.07.18 - 8,91,000 1207 Miss. Rithisha J. Shetty & 28,00,000 23.12.11 30.06,18 - 22,96,000 5,04,000 22,96,000 Jt. 1208 Khushboo A. Dharadhar 28,00,000 16.08,12 20.02.18 22,96,000 000 5,04,000 1304 Bandhna Rangu & Jt. 28,80,000 12,09.11 29,06.17 14,40,000 9,21,600 5,18,400 1308 RakeshV.Shetty&t 34,20,000 20.01.14 19.06.17 17,10,000 10,94,400 10,94,400 6,15,600 Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 28 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 1401 HrushikeshR.Deo& Jt. 43,60,000 12.08.11 29.09.18 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 1402 ShaileshKotadia&J 43,60,000 08.06.12 21.03.17 21,80,000 13,95,200 13,95,200 7,84,800 1405 Mr.UmeshH Pathak & Jt 43,60,000 01.03.12 13.03.18 21,80,000 13,95,200 13,95,200 7,84,800 1502 HarishKarande 43,60,000 07.02.12 07.03.17 21,80,000 13,95,200 13,95,200 7,84,800 1504 MaheshkumareMaurya 28,80,000 23.08.11 06.03.18 23,61,600 5,18,400 23,61,600 &Jt. 1505 NishantraiH Pandey&Jt 43,60,000 21.09.11 11.04.18 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 1508 ShardaR Thakur&Jt. 34,56,000 25.06.14 13.10.17 28,33,920 6,22,080 28,33,920 1605 MeenaK Ashar&Jt. 43,60,000 21.12.12 27.09.17 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 1701 PratimaR, Chavan&Jt 43,60,000 24.02.13 18.03.19 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 1703 AnushriA.Bandekar 28,80,000 08.08.11 19.08.19 23,61,600 5,18,400 23,61,600 1707 BhanuprasadNMewada&Jt. 28,80,000 25.05.12 14.11.17 23,61,600 5,18,400 23,61,600 1805 RampratapMistry 43,60,000 13.10.11 13.11.17 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 13.10.11 13.11.17 1806 DurgadeviMistry 43,60,000 35,75,200 7,84,800 35,75,200 TotalotUniqueAurum-ll 15,08,29,0 2,59,78,0 9,42,43,02 2,62,47,98 9,42,43,02 43,60,000 00 0 0 00
A perusal of above chart suggests that out of 39 A perusal of above chart suggests that out of 39 flats on which flats on which revenue has not been recognized by the appellant during the year, the agreement to has not been recognized by the appellant during the year, the agreement to has not been recognized by the appellant during the year, the agreement to sale was executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 37 cases. In case of flat no. 708 sale was executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 37 cases. In case of flat no. 708 sale was executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 37 cases. In case of flat no. 708 and flat no. 1104, agreement to sell was executed on 20/06/2014 and and flat no. 1104, agreement to sell was executed on 20/06/2014 and and flat no. 1104, agreement to sell was executed on 20/06/2014 and 23/12/2014. Since 23/12/2014. Since the agreement to sell in these two cases has been the agreement to sell in these two cases has been executed before 31/03/2016, therefore, in terms of the directions of executed before 31/03/2016, therefore, in terms of the directions of executed before 31/03/2016, therefore, in terms of the directions of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors, the revenue corresponding Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors, the revenue corresponding Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors, the revenue corresponding to these two flats is required to be recognized during the year to these two flats is required to be recognized during the year to these two flats is required to be recognized during the year under consideration. As per the details submitted by the appellant the sale consideration. As per the details submitted by the appellant the sale consideration. As per the details submitted by the appellant the sale consideration for these two flats is Rs. 62,34,000/ consideration for these two flats is Rs. 62,34,000/- (32,80,000 + 29,54,000). Since the project has been completed to the extent of 25.24%, 29,54,000). Since the project has been completed to the extent of 25.24%, 29,54,000). Since the project has been completed to the extent of 25.24%, therefore, the revenue to the extent of therefore, the revenue to the extent of Rs. 15,73,460/ Rs. 15,73,460/- (25.25% of 62,34,000) is required to be recognized during the year under 62,34,000) is required to be recognized during the year under 62,34,000) is required to be recognized during the year under consideration. For the project Unique Aurum consideration. For the project Unique Aurum-ll, the profit ratio as per ll, the profit ratio as per computation computation computation chart chart chart filed filed filed by by by the the the appellant appellant appellant comes comes comes to to to 21.34% 21.34% 21.34% (10703140/50150250), therefore, the p (10703140/50150250), therefore, the profit on such under reported rofit on such under reported revenue comes to Rs. 3,35,810/ revenue comes to Rs. 3,35,810/- (21.34% of 15,73,460).
Considering the totality facts of the case as discussed above and the 55. Considering the totality facts of the case as discussed above and the 55. Considering the totality facts of the case as discussed above and the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) and Unique Shanti Nem Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP (supra), I am of the opinion inath Developers LLP (supra), I am of the opinion that the assessing officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats that the assessing officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats that the assessing officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable document in the form of agreement to sell. Moreover, the document in the form of agreement to sell. Moreover, the assessing officer assessing officer has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016 has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016 has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016-17. However, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize However, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize However, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize revenue corresponding to flat no. 708 and 1104 during the year under revenue corresponding to flat no. 708 and 1104 during the year under revenue corresponding to flat no. 708 and 1104 during the year under consideration because the agreem consideration because the agreement to sell for these flats have been ent to sell for these flats have been executed before 31/03/2016. As discussed above, the profit on the executed before 31/03/2016. As discussed above, the profit on the executed before 31/03/2016. As discussed above, the profit on the Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 29 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & revenue to be recognized for these two flats comes to Rs. 3,35,810/ revenue to be recognized for these two flats comes to Rs. 3,35,810/ revenue to be recognized for these two flats comes to Rs. 3,35,810/-. Therefore, the addition to the extent of Rs. 3,35,810/ Therefore, the addition to the extent of Rs. 3,35,810/- is upheld. is upheld. Unique Signatur Unique Signature 56. This project was completed to the extent of 40.81%. the appellant has 56. This project was completed to the extent of 40.81%. the appellant has 56. This project was completed to the extent of 40.81%. the appellant has recognized revenue to the extent of 41% of sale value amounting to Rs. recognized revenue to the extent of 41% of sale value amounting to Rs. recognized revenue to the extent of 41% of sale value amounting to Rs. 14,71,66,310/- - which is corresponding to the flats for which sale which is corresponding to the flats for which sale agreement were registered before 31/03/2016 agreement were registered before 31/03/2016. The Assessing Officer did . The Assessing Officer did not agree with the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats not agree with the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats not agree with the appellant and had recognized the revenue for all flats booked by the customers. In this manner, the Assessing Officer has booked by the customers. In this manner, the Assessing Officer has booked by the customers. In this manner, the Assessing Officer has recognized the revenue to the extent of 40.81% of Rs. 27,61,64,720/ recognized the revenue to the extent of 40.81% of Rs. 27,61,64,720/ recognized the revenue to the extent of 40.81% of Rs. 27,61,64,720/- (sale value of all flats booked by customers). flats booked by customers).
The reasons given by the Assessing Officer for recognizing the revenue 57. The reasons given by the Assessing Officer for recognizing the revenue 57. The reasons given by the Assessing Officer for recognizing the revenue on all flats booked by the customer for project namely Unique Signature, on all flats booked by the customer for project namely Unique Signature, on all flats booked by the customer for project namely Unique Signature, are identical to the reasons given for the project namely Unique Aurum are identical to the reasons given for the project namely Unique Aurum are identical to the reasons given for the project namely Unique Aurum-Il. During the assessment proceedings, as well as appellate proceedings, the ng the assessment proceedings, as well as appellate proceedings, the ng the assessment proceedings, as well as appellate proceedings, the appellant has given common contentions for all the three projects which appellant has given common contentions for all the three projects which appellant has given common contentions for all the three projects which have been discussed earlier in this order. Therefore, following my findings have been discussed earlier in this order. Therefore, following my findings have been discussed earlier in this order. Therefore, following my findings given for the project namely Unique Aur given for the project namely Unique Aurum-ll, it is held that the revenue ll, it is held that the revenue should be recognized only for those flats where legally enforceable should be recognized only for those flats where legally enforceable should be recognized only for those flats where legally enforceable document in the form of agreement to sell has been entered into before document in the form of agreement to sell has been entered into before document in the form of agreement to sell has been entered into before 31/03/2016.
For this project, the Assessing Officer has considered the total s 58. For this project, the Assessing Officer has considered the total s 58. For this project, the Assessing Officer has considered the total sale for Unique Signature till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 27,61,64,720/ Unique Signature till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 27,61,64,720/ Unique Signature till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 27,61,64,720/- against the amount of Rs. 14,71,66,310/ amount of Rs. 14,71,66,310/- considered by the assessee, for the purpose considered by the assessee, for the purpose of computation of profit as per ICAl guidelines 2012. The appellant has of computation of profit as per ICAl guidelines 2012. The appellant has of computation of profit as per ICAl guidelines 2012. The appellant has submitted complete details of remain submitted complete details of remaining flats having sale value of Rs. ing flats having sale value of Rs. 12,89,98,410/- -such as date of booking, date of agreement and year of such as date of booking, date of agreement and year of revenue recognized in respect of the flats for which no revenue was revenue recognized in respect of the flats for which no revenue was revenue recognized in respect of the flats for which no revenue was recognized during the year under recognized during the year under consideration even though the flats were consideration even though the flats were booked by the customers. The said details are as under: the customers. The said details are as under: Flat No. Agreement Agreement Date of Date of Revenue Recognition Name Value Booking Agreemen t A.Y2017- A.Y.2018 A.Y.2019- A.Y.2019 A.Y.2020 AY 2021- 18 -19 20 20 -21 22 Unique Signature 104 Harpal Singh Gulati 47,30,000 47,30,000 19.06.14 20.02.17 25,06,900 8,04,100 1,89,200 1,89,200 7,09,500 5,20,300 105 Mr. Harpal Singh 47,30,000 47,30,000 19.06.14 13.12.17 - 33,11,00 1,89,200 1,89,200 7,09,500 5,20,300 Gulati 0 201 Mrs. Naseem Bano 49,21,800 49,21,800 07.11.14 10.07.18 - 34,45,26 12,96,872 12,96,872 7,38,270 5,41,398 Shaikh 0 304 Mrs. Kamini Kaur & 46,26,150 46,26,150 06.08.14 28.05.18 - 32,38,30 1,85,046 1,85,046 6,93,923 5,08,876 Jt. 5 305 Mrs. Kamini Kaur & 46,26,150 46,26,150 06.08.14 28.05.18 - 32,38,30 1,85,046 1,85,046 6,93,923 5,08,876 Jt. 5 306 Mrs. Shabbana Aamir 70,45,100 70,45,100 12.07.15 23.11.16 37,33,903 11,97,66 2,81,804 2,81,804 10,56,76 7,74,961 Chikte & Jt. 7 5 Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 30 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & 404 Mr. Ayaz Abdul Kadar 49,94,070 49,94,070 13.11.14 16.02.18 - 34,95,84 1,99,763 1,99,763 7,49,110 5,49,348 Shaikh & Jt. 9 405 Mr. Azam Hussain 49,13,840 49,13,840 20.05.14 23.01.18 - 34,39,68 1,96,554 1,96,554 7,37,076 5,40,522 Qazi Syed 8 505 Mr. Aabid Husain 45,56,800 45,56,800 20.12.14 30.12.21 - 31,89,76 1,82,272 1,82,272 6,83,520 5,01,248 Patrawala 0 601 Mr. Ashif T. Sorathiya 49,28,370 49,28,370 05.09.14 24.04.18 - 34,49,85 1,97,135 1,97,135 7,39,255 5,42,121 & Jt. 9 602 Mr. Terry D’souza & 63,68,660 63,68,660 27.06.14 07.02.23 - 44,58,06 2,54,746 2,54,746 9,55,299 7,00,553 Jt. 2 701 Mr. Deepak Singh & 5,20,350 31.10.14 12.07.17 26,60,786 8,53,460 2,00,814 2,00,814 7,53,053 5,52,238 Jt. 706 Mr. Mohammed 44,95,000 44,95,000 15.09.11 13.01.17 23,82,350 7,64,150 1,79,800 1,79,800 6,74,250 4,94,450 Taiyeb Bhoira 805 Mr. Tarashankar 31,16,750 31,16,750 09.07.11 22.04.12 16,51,878 5,29,848 1,24,670 1,24,670 4,67,513 3,42,842 Singh 906 Mr. Shaikh Rafique 70,56,000 70,56,000 01.02.16 30.06.17 37,39,680 11,99,52 2,82,240 2,82,240 10,58,40 7,76,160 Ahmed & Jt. 0 0 1001 Smt. Sapna O. Pandit 50,59,770 50,59,770 09.12.14 14.02.18 - 35,41,83 2,02,391 2,02,391 7,58,965 5,65,575 & Jt. 9 1005 Mrs. Rajeshwari N. 50,79,480 50,79,480 31.10.14 17.06.17 26,92,124 8,63,512 2,03,179 2,03,179 7,61,922 5,58,743 Singh 1101 Farha Abdul Hameed 51,20,360 51,20,360 28.07.14 28.07.17 27,13,791 8,70,461 2,04,814 2,04,814 7,68,054 5,63,240 Shaikh 1104 Mr. Iqubal Ahmed 51,18,000 51,18,000 23.12.15 21.09.16 27,12,540 8,70,060 2,04,720 2,04,720 7,67,700 5,62,980 Abdul Lateef & Jtd. 1205 Miss. Sarah Melital 51,14,520 51,14,520 28.05.14 07.11.17 - 35,80,16 2,04,581 2,04,581 7,67,178 5,62,597 Lobo 4 1304 Mr. Rakesh Sequeira 51,78,030 51,78,030 28.07.14 24.07.17 27,44,356 8,80,265 2,07,121 2,07,121 7,76,705 5,69,583 & Jt. 1305 Mohamad Abdul 45,38,720 45,38,720 25.05.15 10.08.16 22,06,947 8,43,407 1,98,449 1,98,449 7,44,183 5,45,734 Rehman 1404 Mr. Faizanl. 51,18,900 51,18,900 01.07.14 27.04.17 - 35,83,23 2,04,756 2,04,756 7,67,835 5,63,079 Choudhry 0 1405 Mr. Raj Kumar & Jt. 51,53,940 51,53,940 22.03.16 27.04.17 27,31,588 8,76,170 2,06,158 2,06,158 7,73,091 5,66,933 1505 Mr. Sajid Kachhi 47,35,650 47,35,650 12.09.14 23.03.17 25,09,895 8,05,061 1,89,426 1,89,426 7,10,348 5,20,921 Shop Mohammed 26,52,000 26,52,000 26.02.16 28.03.17 14,05,560 4,50,840 1,06,080 1,06,080 2,91,720 No. 5 Khajamohd Haji & Jt. Total of Unique 12,89,98,410 12,89,98,410 3,63,92,2 5377984 51,76,837 51,76,837 1,94,13,1 1,42,36298 Signature 98 2 38
A perusal of above chart suggests that out of 26 flats A perusal of above chart suggests that out of 26 flats on which revenue on which revenue has not been recognized during the year, the agreement to sale was has not been recognized during the year, the agreement to sale was has not been recognized during the year, the agreement to sale was executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 25 cases. In case of flat no. 805, executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 25 cases. In case of flat no. 805, executed beyond 31/03/2016 in 25 cases. In case of flat no. 805, agreement to sell was executed on 22/04/2012. Since the agreement to agreement to sell was executed on 22/04/2012. Since the agreement to agreement to sell was executed on 22/04/2012. Since the agreement to sell has been executed before 31/03/20 sell has been executed before 31/03/2016, therefore, in terms of the 16, therefore, in terms of the directions of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the directions of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the directions of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra), the revenue corresponding to flat no. 805, is required to be recognized during revenue corresponding to flat no. 805, is required to be recognized during revenue corresponding to flat no. 805, is required to be recognized during the year under consideration. the year under consideration. As per the details submitted by the As per the details submitted by the appellant, the sale consideration for this flat is Rs. 31,16,750/ the sale consideration for this flat is Rs. 31,16,750/ the sale consideration for this flat is Rs. 31,16,750/-. Since the project has been completed to the extent of 40.81%, therefore, the revenue project has been completed to the extent of 40.81%, therefore, the revenue project has been completed to the extent of 40.81%, therefore, the revenue to the extent of Rs. 12,71,945/ to the extent of Rs. 12,71,945/- (40.81% of 31,16,750) is required to be 31,16,750) is required to be recognized during the year under consider recognized during the year under consideration.
For the project Unique Signature, the profit ratio as per computation chart For the project Unique Signature, the profit ratio as per computation chart For the project Unique Signature, the profit ratio as per computation chart filed by the appellant comes to 22.62% (1,36,49,858/6,03,38, 187), filed by the appellant comes to 22.62% (1,36,49,858/6,03,38, 187), filed by the appellant comes to 22.62% (1,36,49,858/6,03,38, 187), Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 31 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & therefore, the profit on such under therefore, the profit on such under-reported revenue comes to Rs. reported revenue comes to Rs. 2,87,743/- (22.62% of 12,71,945). (22.62% of 12,71,945).
Considering the totality of facts of the case as discussed above and the nsidering the totality of facts of the case as discussed above and the nsidering the totality of facts of the case as discussed above and the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Shankala Realtors (supra) and Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP (supra), I am of the opinion Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP (supra), I am of the opinion Unique Shanti Neminath Developers LLP (supra), I am of the opinion ring the assessing officer has erred ring the assessing officer has erred in recognizing the revenue for all flats in recognizing the revenue for all flats ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable ignoring the fact that in many cases, there was no legally enforceable document in the form of agreement to sell. Moreover, the assessing officer document in the form of agreement to sell. Moreover, the assessing officer document in the form of agreement to sell. Moreover, the assessing officer has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016 has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016 has not been consistent in the method adopted by him in AY 2016-17. However, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize owever, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize owever, as discussed above, the appellant was required to recognize revenue corresponding to flat no. 805 of Unique Signature project during revenue corresponding to flat no. 805 of Unique Signature project during revenue corresponding to flat no. 805 of Unique Signature project during the year under consideration because the agreement to sell for this flat has the year under consideration because the agreement to sell for this flat has the year under consideration because the agreement to sell for this flat has been executed before 31/03/2016. As di been executed before 31/03/2016. As discussed above, the profit on the scussed above, the profit on the revenue to be recognized for this flat comes to Rs. 2,87,743/ revenue to be recognized for this flat comes to Rs. 2,87,743/ revenue to be recognized for this flat comes to Rs. 2,87,743/-. Therefore, the addition to the extent of Rs. 2,87,743/ the addition to the extent of Rs. 2,87,743/- is upheld. Unique Homes Unique Homes 61. For the project namely Unique Homes, there is no dispute that the 61. For the project namely Unique Homes, there is no dispute that the 61. For the project namely Unique Homes, there is no dispute that the project was completed to the extent of 28%. The appellant has however as completed to the extent of 28%. The appellant has however as completed to the extent of 28%. The appellant has however claimed that only 13.13% of total area is secured by legally enforceable claimed that only 13.13% of total area is secured by legally enforceable claimed that only 13.13% of total area is secured by legally enforceable agreements. The appellant, therefore, did not recognize any revenue form agreements. The appellant, therefore, did not recognize any revenue form agreements. The appellant, therefore, did not recognize any revenue form this project because the condition that at least this project because the condition that at least 25% of project areashould 25% of project areashould be secured by legally enforceable agreements, is not fulfilled. Against this, be secured by legally enforceable agreements, is not fulfilled. Against this, be secured by legally enforceable agreements, is not fulfilled. Against this, the Assessing Officer has held that percentage of total area sold by the the Assessing Officer has held that percentage of total area sold by the the Assessing Officer has held that percentage of total area sold by the appellant comes to 36.62%. appellant comes to 36.62%. While computing this percentage, the While computing this percentage, the Assessing Offic Assessing Officer has considered all the flats in which more than 10% of er has considered all the flats in which more than 10% of sale consideration has been received irrespective of execution of agreement sale consideration has been received irrespective of execution of agreement sale consideration has been received irrespective of execution of agreement to sell. The Assessing Officer has considered the booking form/allotment to sell. The Assessing Officer has considered the booking form/allotment to sell. The Assessing Officer has considered the booking form/allotment letter as legally enforceable agreement. letter as legally enforceable agreement.
The reasons reasons reasons given given given by by by the the the Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer for for for holding holding holding booking/allotment letter as legally enforceable agreement and for booking/allotment letter as legally enforceable agreement and for booking/allotment letter as legally enforceable agreement and for recognizing the revenue on all flats booked by the customer for project recognizing the revenue on all flats booked by the customer for project recognizing the revenue on all flats booked by the customer for project namely Unique Homes, are identical to the reasons given for the pro namely Unique Homes, are identical to the reasons given for the pro namely Unique Homes, are identical to the reasons given for the project namely Unique Aurum namely Unique Aurum-ll. During the assessment proceedings, as well as ll. During the assessment proceedings, as well as appellate proceedings, the appellant has given common contentions for all appellate proceedings, the appellant has given common contentions for all appellate proceedings, the appellant has given common contentions for all the three projects which have been discussed earlier in this order. the three projects which have been discussed earlier in this order. the three projects which have been discussed earlier in this order. Therefore, following my findings given Therefore, following my findings given for the project namely Unique for the project namely Unique Aurum-ll, it is held that the only area for those flats can be considered as ll, it is held that the only area for those flats can be considered as ll, it is held that the only area for those flats can be considered as secured by legally enforceable agreement where document in the form of secured by legally enforceable agreement where document in the form of secured by legally enforceable agreement where document in the form of agreement to sell has been entered into before 31/03/2016. agreement to sell has been entered into before 31/03/2016. agreement to sell has been entered into before 31/03/2016.
For this projec 63. For this project, the Assessing Officer has considered the total sale for t, the Assessing Officer has considered the total sale for ansi die Unique Homes till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 16,14,10,860/ ansi die Unique Homes till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 16,14,10,860/ ansi die Unique Homes till 31/03/2016 at Rs. 16,14,10,860/- against the amount of Rs. Nil considered by the assessee, for the purpose of amount of Rs. Nil considered by the assessee, for the purpose of computation of profit as per ICAI guidelines 2012. The appel computation of profit as per ICAI guidelines 2012. The appel computation of profit as per ICAI guidelines 2012. The appellant has submitted complete details of these flats having sale value of Rs. submitted complete details of these flats having sale value of Rs. submitted complete details of these flats having sale value of Rs. 16,14,10,860/- - such as date of booking, date of agreement and year of such as date of booking, date of agreement and year of revenue recognized in respect of these flats for which no revenue was revenue recognized in respect of these flats for which no revenue was revenue recognized in respect of these flats for which no revenue was Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 32 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & recognized during the year under conside recognized during the year under consideration even though the flats were ration even though the flats were booked by the customers. The said details are as under: booked by the customers. The said details are as under:- Flat No. Name Agreement Agreement Date of Date of Revenue Recognition Value Booking Agreeme nt A.Y2017- A.Y.2018 A.Y.2019- A.Y.2019 A.Y.2020- AY 2021- 18 -19 20 20 21 22 Unique Signature A-103 Sheela O. Balmiki & Jt. 33,48,810 33,48,810 11.04.13 01.03.19 - - 13,39,524 13,39,524 9,37,667 2,00,928 A-104 Shambuling B. Badegar 22,23,000 22,23,000 14.02.13 12.10.20 - - - 15,11,640 1,33,380 A-105 Rita Singh w/o Amit 23,42,925 23,42,925 15.01.13 14.10.19 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 Kumar A-302 Jyoti A. Bataviya & Jt. 35,64,450 35,64,450 16.01.13 13.11.18 - - 14,25,780 14,25,780 9,98,046 2,13,867 A-306 Mrs. Neeta S. Dave 33,04,375 33,04,375 21.09.13 - - - 23,82,975 2,10,263 A-502 Chetan S. Gadoya & Jt 35,64,450 35,64,450 12.04.13 20.04.19 - - 14,25,780 14,25,780 9,98,046 2,13,867 A-503 Nikita U. Thakkar & Jt. 31,43,925 31,43,925 24.12.12 11.06.14 9,74,617 1,88,636 94,317 94,317 8,80,299 1,88,636 A-504 Morris John D’souza 23,42,925 23,42,925 21.01.13 13.10.14 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 A-505 Praveen Kumar Yadav 23,42,925 23,42,925 24.01.13 09.10.19 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 & Jt. A-506 Laila N. Pirani 35,04,375 35,04,375 15.02.14 16.05.15 10,86,356 2,10,263 1,05,131 1,05,131 9,81,225 2,10,263 A-705 Priya M. Gupa 21,06,000 21,06,000 27.12.12. 18.02.19 - - 8,42,400 8,42,400 8,89,680 1,26,360 A-706 Hiteshree V. Shrimakar 35,04,375 35,04,375 12.01.13 05.07.19 - - 14,01,750 14,01,750 9,81,225 2,10,263 A-707 Mamta Ashwin Parikh 35,04,375 35,04,375 12.01.13 - - - 23,82,975 2,10,263 A-901 Kulsum Akbar Somani 35,64,450 35,64,450 05.02.13 - - - 24,23,826 2,13,867 A-902 Rafiq Vazirbhail 35,64,450 35,64,450 28.01.13 02.05.16 11,04,980 2,13,867 1,06,933 1,06,933 9,98,046 2,13,867 Lagadia & Jt. A-903 Sachin H. Savla 31,43,925 31,43,925 27.03.14 26.10.18 - - 12,57,570 12,57,570 8,80,299 1,88,636 A-904 Dwarka Swarup Simlot 22,42,925 22,42,925 08.01.13 17.02.21 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 A-905 Rajesh Jain 23,42,925 23,42,925 08.01.13 26.06.14 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 A-1102 Veena Ashok Gala 25,64,450 25,64,450 09.10.14 15.10.19 - - - 24,23,826 2,13,867 A-1103 Mr. Bhupinder Singh 31,43,925 31,43,925 04.02.13 18.06.14 9,74,617 1,88,636 94,317 94,317 8,80,299 1,88,636 Sethi & Jt. A-1104 Mr. Akbar R. Somani 23,42,925 23,42,925 05.02.13 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 A-1105 Jayshree Atul Mehta 23,42,925 23,42,925 18.01.13 11.01.19 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 A-1106 Ranjan Satish Gala & 35,04,375 35,04,375 12.02.16 27.05.19 - - 14,01,750 14,01,750 9,81,225 2,10,263 Jt. A-1107 Mrs. Sandhya Anand 35,04,375 35,04,375 05.01.13 20.01.01 - 12,96,61 1,05,131 1,05,131 9,81,225 2,10,263 Kumar Gautam 7 9 Unique Homes – B B-101 Pawan Kumar Mishra & 24,00,840 24,00,840 07.02.14 13.11.14 7,44,260 (7,44,260 9,60,336 9,60,336 6,72,325 1,44,051 Jt. ) B-102 Rizwan Bahuali 23,42,925 23,42,925 04.09.13 08.02.17 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 Zamindar B-104 Mr. Virendra Kandari 23,42,925 23,42,925 09.10.13 25.11.20 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 B-106 Mr. Imran Irfan Khan 34,44,300 34,44,300 04.09.13 20.02.17 10,67,733 2,06,658 1,03,329 1,03,329 9,64,404 2,06,658 B-303 Mr. Saroj D. Tripathi 23,42,925 23,42,925 15.09.13 20.12.14 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 B-305 Mr. Chandra 25,63,200 25,63,200 14.10.13 15.12.18 - - 10,25,280 10,25,280 7,17,696 1,53,792 Bhanjadhwani B-306 Mr. Kundan Mal Goyal 34,44,300 34,44,300 08.10.13 - - - 23,42,124 2,06,658 B-501 Mr. Rajesh I. Yadav 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 02.03.16 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 33 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & B-502 Mr. Imran Irfan Khan 23,42,925 23,42,925 04.09.13 08.02.17 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 B-503 Mrs. Neha Jigish 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 13.11.18 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 Chiniwala & Jt. B-504 Trupti A. Ghelani & Jt. 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 06.09.18 - 8,66,882 70,288 70,288 6,56,019 1,40,576 B-506 Mrs. Renu Gupta 34,44,300 34,44,300 01.09.13 - - - 23,42,124 2,06,658 B-701 Mr. Rajiv Kishore 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.12.14 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 Gadda B-702 Mr. Shivkumar K. Pal 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 18.10.18 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 B-703 Mr. Harish Koliyar 23,42,925 23,42,925 19.09.13 12.11.18 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 B-704 Jasmine C. Rathod & 23,42,925 23,42,925 17.09.13 27.06.19 - - 9,37,170 9,37,170 6,56,019 1,40,576 Jt. B-705 Mr. Rajiv B. Bhandari & 25,63,200 25,63,200 30.08.13 06.10.18 - - 10.25,280 10.25,280 7,17,696 1,53,792 Jt. B-901 Mr. Uday Kantilal 23,42,925 23,42,925 17.09.13 - - - 15,93,189 1,40,576 Somani & Jt. B-905 Rekha Deepak Patel & 25,63,200 25,63,200 17.09.13 26.06.14 7,94,592 1,53,792 76,896 76,896 7,17,696 1,53,792 Jt. B-1101 Mr. Arun Kumar 23,42,925 23,42,925 14.09.13 05.07.14 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 Agarwal B-1102 Mr. Arun Kumar 23,42,925 23,42,925 14.09.13 05.07.14 7,26,307 1,40,576 70,287 70,287 6,56,019 1,40,576 Agarwal B-1105 Jaykumar R. Patel & Jt. 25,63,200 25,63,200 19.09.13 09.10.20 - - - 17,42,976 1,53,792 13,15,90,350 Cancelled Flats UH A-501 Mr. Puriben Devabhai 35,64,450 35,64,450 02.02.13 Not Done Patel & Jt. A-906 Sanjeeva Shetty 35,04,375 35,04,375 02.05.13 Not Done A-105 Hema Jitendra Desai & 26,26,560 26,26,560 12.02.14 Not Done Jt. B-301 Mrs. Raminder A 23,42,560 23,42,560 14.09.13 Not Done Sablok B-302 Mr. Rajesh Vijay Dubey 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 Not Done B-304 Mr. Sanjeev J. Parker & 23,42,925 23,42,925 30.08.13 Not Done Jt. B-505 Mr. Yatin Manani & Jt. 25,63,200 25,63,200 19.09.13 Not Done B-902 Mr. Vipul G. Belani 23,42,925 23,42,925 08.09.13 Not Done B-1202 Mr. Ajay R. Verma & Jt. 23,42,925 23,42,925 04.09.13 Not Done B-1204 Mrs. Aarti R. Verma & 23,42,925 23,42,925 04.09.13 Not Done Jt.
Value of Cancelled flats 2,98,20,51 2,98,20,51 0 Total of Unique Homes 16,14,10,8 16,14,10,8 12557611 37,05,70 1,90,47,10 1,90,47,10 54077819 78,87,212 A&B 60 1 8 It can be seen from the above chart that bookings for 11 flats having sale It can be seen from the above chart that bookings for 11 flats having sale It can be seen from the above chart that bookings for 11 flats having sale value of Rs. 2,98,20,510/ value of Rs. 2,98,20,510/- were subsequently cancelled.
It is further seen that out of remaining 47 flats, agreement to sell in 12 It is further seen that out of remaining 47 flats, agreement to sell in 12 It is further seen that out of remaining 47 flats, agreement to sell in 12 cases were entered into before 31/03/2016. The details of area for these cases were entered into before 31/03/2016. The details of area for these cases were entered into before 31/03/2016. The details of area for these flatswere furnished by the appellant during the assessment proceedings flatswere furnished by the appellant during the assessment proceedings flatswere furnished by the appellant during the assessment proceedings Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 34 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & along with reply dated 15.12.2018 wh along with reply dated 15.12.2018 which is 8070 sq. ft. Since the carpet ich is 8070 sq. ft. Since the carpet area of the project secured by legally enforceable agreement to sell is less area of the project secured by legally enforceable agreement to sell is less area of the project secured by legally enforceable agreement to sell is less than 25% of the total area of the project, therefore, the condition (c) of para than 25% of the total area of the project, therefore, the condition (c) of para than 25% of the total area of the project, therefore, the condition (c) of para 5.3 of guidance note is not fulfilled. Hence, as per the guida 5.3 of guidance note is not fulfilled. Hence, as per the guidance note issued nce note issued by ICAl, no revenue for the project namely Unique Homes is required to be by ICAl, no revenue for the project namely Unique Homes is required to be by ICAl, no revenue for the project namely Unique Homes is required to be recognized during the year under consideration. Therefore, the action of recognized during the year under consideration. Therefore, the action of recognized during the year under consideration. Therefore, the action of the Assessing Officer in recognizing the revenue amounting to Rs. the Assessing Officer in recognizing the revenue amounting to Rs. the Assessing Officer in recognizing the revenue amounting to Rs. 4,50,60,551/- for the project Unique Homes is erroneous. It is not out of ct Unique Homes is erroneous. It is not out of place to mention that the appellant has recognized revenue from this place to mention that the appellant has recognized revenue from this place to mention that the appellant has recognized revenue from this project in subsequent assessment year as tabulated above which have project in subsequent assessment year as tabulated above which have project in subsequent assessment year as tabulated above which have been accepted by the assessing officer in assessments for subsequent been accepted by the assessing officer in assessments for subsequent been accepted by the assessing officer in assessments for subsequent years.
To sum up, out of the addition of Rs. 2,62,17,851/ 65. To sum up, out of the addition of Rs. 2,62,17,851/- - made by the Assessing Officer by treating the booking forms/allotment letters as legally Assessing Officer by treating the booking forms/allotment letters as legally Assessing Officer by treating the booking forms/allotment letters as legally enforceable agreement, addition to the extent of Rs. 6,23,553/ enforceable agreement, addition to the extent of Rs. 6,23,553/ enforceable agreement, addition to the extent of Rs. 6,23,553/- (3,35,810 + 2,87,743) is confirmed. The rem 2,87,743) is confirmed. The remaining addition is directed to be deleted. aining addition is directed to be deleted. The ground no. 3 raised by the appellant is PARTLY ALLOWED. The ground no. 3 raised by the appellant is PARTLY ALLOWED. The ground no. 3 raised by the appellant is PARTLY ALLOWED.” 7.2 We have heard rival submissions and perused the finding of ld have heard rival submissions and perused the finding of ld have heard rival submissions and perused the finding of ld CIT(A) reproduced above. We CIT(A) reproduced above. We concur with the finding of the Ld. concur with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) for considering CIT(A) for considering the transfer of risk and reward and revenue the transfer of risk and reward and revenue to the buyer at the stage of entering into a registered sale agreement to the buyer at the stage of entering into a registered sale agreement to the buyer at the stage of entering into a registered sale agreement as held by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sankalp Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has Sankalp Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has Sankalp Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has thoroughly examined all the allotment letters and sale agreements y examined all the allotment letters and sale agreements y examined all the allotment letters and sale agreements and thereafter, he upheld the addition to the extent of he upheld the addition to the extent of he upheld the addition to the extent of Rs.3,35,180/- (paragraph 55) in respect of project namely (paragraph 55) in respect of project namely (paragraph 55) in respect of project namely ‘Unique Aurum-II’. Similarly, in respect of project namely . Similarly, in respect of project namely ‘Unique Signature Unique Signature’ also the Ld. CIT(A) verified the allotment/sale agreements entered e Ld. CIT(A) verified the allotment/sale agreements entered e Ld. CIT(A) verified the allotment/sale agreements entered into with the buyers and upheld the addition to the extent of into with the buyers and upheld the addition to the extent of into with the buyers and upheld the addition to the extent of Rs.2,87,743/-. In this manner Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the . In this manner Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the . In this manner Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the disallowance to the extent of Rs.6,23,553/ disallowance to the extent of Rs.6,23,553/- (Rs.3,35,810/ (Rs.3,35,810/- + 2,87,743/-). In our opinion, the finding of the ld CIT(A) on the issue ur opinion, the finding of the ld CIT(A) on the issue ur opinion, the finding of the ld CIT(A) on the issue in dispute is well reasoned and w in dispute is well reasoned and we don’t find any infirmity in the e don’t find any infirmity in the Unique Shanti Developers LLP Unique Shanti Developers LLP 35 & 3902/MUM/2023 ITA Nos. 3856 & finding of ld CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. finding of ld CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. Accordingly, we uphold Accordingly, we uphold the finding of the Ld. CIT(A). T the finding of the Ld. CIT(A). The ground No. 2 of the appeal of he ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed. Revenue is accordingly dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed whereas is dismissed whereas the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose. the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose. the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose.