THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. S.N BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.240 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C R BUILDIGNS, QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CIRCLE-4(1), BANGLAORE. .... APPELLANTS (BY MR. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. S.N. BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS SNN AGORA, RAJ LAKE VIEW NO.3761, 29TH MAIN BTM II STAGE N S PALYA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-506 076. ... RESPONDENT (BY MR. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR MR. M. LAVA, ADV.,) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 03.12.2014 PASSED IN ITA NO.1366/BANG/2013 AND 1707/BANG/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, PRAYING TO:

2 (i) DECIDE THE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT. (ii) SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 03-12-2014 PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'B' BENCH, BANGALORE AS SOUGHT FOR IN THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE'S CASE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS IN ITA NO.1366/BANG/2013 AND ITA NO.1707/BANG/2013 FOR A.Y. 2010-11. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been filed by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2010-11. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.01.2016 on the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that assessee is entitled for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the I.T. Act even when the assessee has not satisfied the requirements of the said provision?" 3. The following additional substantial question of law was framed by order dated 07.01.2021:

3 "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that 'Project Completion Method' adopted by assessee requires to be accepted as against 'Percentage Completion Method' applied by assessing authority by relying upon its earlier decision in case of assessee which has been challenged before this Hon'ble Court and when assessing authority rightly recognized income for purpose of tax by holding that advances are received by assessee as and when constructions progresses resulting in profit to assessee?" 4. For the reasons assigned by us in ITA No.393/2014 passed today, this appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV