Awadhesh Builders v. ITO

37 SOT 122Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#8059 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)

Judgments citing Awadhesh Builders v. ITO

ITO, KOLKATA vs. HARMONY VINIMAY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1978/KOL/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Kolkata Harmony Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Ward11(1), P-7, Chowringhee Square, 6 Th Floor, 67, Chistopher Road, Kolkata Vs. Kolkata-700069 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacch3211P Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Smt Puja Somai, Ars Revenue By : Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan and Smt PujaFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, DR
Section 143(1)

…hat the assessee is a real estate developer and is not a civil contractor. It was argued that the civil contract could not be equated with the contract for sale of flats by relying on the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Avadesh Builders (2010)37 SOT 122 (Mum). The ld. Authorized Representative submitted that ICDS-III was not applicable in the case of the assessee for revenue ecognition. Since the definition of construction contract as given in ICDS-III did not apply to the construction of flats by the assessee as a real estate developer which was in the nature of combined contract. The ld. Author…

ACIT 28(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. NEEL SIDDHI DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1693/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit 28(2) Vs. M/S Neel Siddhi Room No. 307, 3Rd Floor Developers, Tower No. 6, Vashi Rly 2Nd Floor, Emerald, Stn Complex, Vashi Plot No. 195/B, Navi Mumbai – 400703 Sec-12, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagfn2744N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Chetan M. Kacha.Dr Respondent By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi.Ar Date Of Hearing 14.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.11.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 26, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan M. Kacha.DRFor Respondent: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi.AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…perative to analyze some relevant case laws in this regard which have also been cited by the assessee in its submission. The assessee has among others relied upon the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Tribunal, Mumbai in the case of Awadesh Builders V. Ito reported in 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai) wherein it has been held that project completion method adopted by the assessee who is a builder and real estate developer is justified instead of the percentage completion method as computed by the department. While giving this finding, the Hon. Tribunal relied upon the decisions of the Hon. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Bilahari I…

THE ACIT, (OSD)CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. SATYAM DEVELOPERS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2727/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 145Section 145(3)

…at the revised AS-7 is not applicable to the appellant company as it is applicable to contractor. Accounting Standard - 9 is applicable to the appellant company. The A.R has also relied upon the decision in the case of Awadhesh Builders vs. Income Tax Officer 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai) in support of the contention that the Accounting Standard - 7 is not applicable to the appellant company and Accounting Standard - 9 is applicable to it. The appellant is following AS - 9 prescribed by the ICAI. From the perusal of various documents filed in the Paper Book, it is seen that the land for the project has been acquired by the…

ITO 14(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. SEA SAGAR CONSTRUCTION CO., MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3751/MUM/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3751/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2000-01) बिाम/ Ito 14(2)(2) M/S. Sea Sagar R.No. 304, 3 Rd Floor, Construction Company, Earnest House, Abhay House, 1St Floor, V. Nariman Point, 428, Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai- 400021 Mumbai 400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aacfs2838L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. D.G Pansari Assessee By: Shri. Nitesh Joshi सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue , Being Ita No. 3751/Mum/2014, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 12.03.2014, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) Vide Cit(A)-25/It-204/14(2)(2)/11-12, For Assessment Year 2000-01, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2011 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2000-01. This Is Second Round Of Litigation Before The Tribunal. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Revenue In The Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Tribunal”) Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. D.G Pansari
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n.com 213 (Mum.) 6. CIT v. Khoday Distilleries Ltd (Kar HC) (ITRC Nos. 19 to 21 of 1993, dated 12.9.1995) 7. CIT v. V. S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd.[1996] (131 CTR 203) (Bombay) 8. CIT v. Vikas Oberoi (165 Taxation 7)(Bombay HC) 9. Awadhesh Builders v. 1TO [2010] (37 SOT 122)(Mum) 10. ACIT v. Rajesh Builders (2004-TI0L-88-ITAT-MUM) 11. ACIT v. Flowmore Pvt. Ltd. [1989] 33 TTJ (Del) 17 12. CIT v. Manju Gupta (RA No. 756/Bombay/94 and RA No. 757/Bom/94 order dated 10th Feb, 1995, Revenue required the Tribunal to refer the following question to Bom HC for its opinion. 13. Malka Construction Co. (ITA No. 4068-4069/Bom/85…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INDIRAPURAM HABITAT CENTRE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3225/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…nt case was regularly following the project completion method and has offered the income in the year of completion of project, there is no sound as to why the same should be rejected and percentage completion method be followed. Awdesh Builders vs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai) Prestige Estate Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Bang) 680: (2010) 33, DTR (Bang) (Trib) 514 followed.” 5. Respectfully following the same we hold that A.S.-7 does not apply to the facts of the case. Hence the system of accounting followed by the assessee consistently over the years has to be upheld.” (2.1.1) The Ld. AR of…

NANJI D. PATEL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5519/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Shamim Yahya, Am& Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5519/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Hiro Rai, ARFor Respondent: Shri AarjuGarodia, DR
Section 145(3)

…hod adopted by the assessee results in distortion of profits, the Department can insist on substitution of the existing method". 9. On the similar facts as in the case of the appellant herein, the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in Awadhesh Builders Vrs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 122 (Mum) held that Project Completion Method adopted by the assessee builder and real estate developer was justified instead of Percentage Completion Method as contested by the Department. 10. The above judgments have not been rebutted by the revenue. Even no forceful reasons have been demonstrated by the ITO in deviating from the method of accounti…

ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. BELLOR HOMES AND REALOTRS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4445/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Sheth, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, D.R

…e was regularly following the project completion method therefore, there is no sound reason as to why the same should be rejected and percentage completion method be followed. It is noted that Mumbai Tribunal in the case of AWADESH BUILDERS v. ITO reported in 37 SOT 122 (MUM BAI) has held that project completion method adopted by the assessee builder and real estate developer is justified instead of the percentage completion method as computed by the department. While giving this finding, the Hon. Tribunal relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. BILAHARI INVESTMENT (P) LTD. repor…

ITO, WD-19(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. MATUSHREE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 2652/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The Ito, Ward 19(2)(3), M/S Matushree Builders & Room No. 221, Matru Mandir, Developers, Mumbai - 400007 84-A, Gr. Flr., Appollo House, Vs. B.S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400023 Pan: Aanfm0260F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Golecha (AR)For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(2)

…2 by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT vs. Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 1, Hon’ble Delhi High Court CIT vs. Manish Build Well Private Limited 245 CTR 397(Del.) and decision of co-ordinate Bench in Avadhesh Builder vs. ITO 37 SOT 122 Mum (Trib). The operative part of the order of the Tribunal reads as under: 4 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 “We also find that the assessee has claimed to have duly paid the entire taxes from the profit earned on the said project by following project completion method albeit in subsequent years and it is claimed that no prejudice has been caused t…

SHREE SAI DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1247/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhm/S. Shree Sai Developers Dcit-23(1) 109, Bharat Industrial Estate, Mumbai . Lbs Marg, Bhandup (West), Vs. Mumbai – 400 078. Pan: Aaofs9233R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal (AR)For Respondent: Shri V.Justin (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)

…e on adhoc basis which is not justified. The AO was not justified in rejecting the project completion method adopted by assessee. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Tribunal in Awadhesh Builders vs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 122(Mum). On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities below. It was argued that the assessee has undertaken the construction of nine building consisting of five residential and four commercial building. The assessee has received entire consideration in respect of four residential building and two commercial buildin…

ITO 16(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MATUSHREE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6178/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6178/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) I.T.O. – 16(2)(2), M/S Matushree Builders & बनाम/ R. No. 214, 2Nd Floor, Developers, V. Matru Mandir, 8-A, Gr. Flr., Tardeo Road, Apollo House, Mumbai – 400 007. B.S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aanfm0260F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri BeharilalFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 145

…lier years .The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the appellate orders of the learned CIT(A). The learned counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions’ : (i) CIT v. Manish Build Well (P) Ltd. 245 CTR (Del) 397 (ii) Awadhesh Builders v. ITO 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai)(Trib) (iii) ITO v. Pratiksha Enterprises 4 DTR (Mumbai)(Trib) 547 (iv) Abode Construction Ltd. v. ITO 95 TTJ (Mumbai)(Trib) 35 (v) ACIT v.Rajesh Builders 3 SOT 917 (Mumbai)(Trib) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material including the case laws cited by both the parties. The assessee is engaged in the business of co…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S INDIRAPURAM HABIBAT CENTRE PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue for the A

ITA 4930/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu, J.M. & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am

For Appellant: Sh. PC Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh.Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 263

…was regularly following the project completion method and has offered the income in the year of completion of project, there is no sound reason as to why the same should be rejected and percentage completion method be followed. Awadesh Builders vs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai) Prestige Estate Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Bang) 680 : (2010) 33, DTR (Bang)(Trib) 514 followed.” 5. Respectfully following the same we hold that A.S.-7 does not apply to the facts of the case. Hence the system of accounting followed by the assessee consistently over the years has to be upheld. 6. In the result the ap…

MRS. INDRAPURAM HABITAT CENTRE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue for the A

ITA 2416/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu, J.M. & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am

For Appellant: Sh. PC Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh.Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 263

…was regularly following the project completion method and has offered the income in the year of completion of project, there is no sound reason as to why the same should be rejected and percentage completion method be followed. Awadesh Builders vs. ITO (2010) 37 SOT 122 (Mumbai) Prestige Estate Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Bang) 680 : (2010) 33, DTR (Bang)(Trib) 514 followed.” 5. Respectfully following the same we hold that A.S.-7 does not apply to the facts of the case. Hence the system of accounting followed by the assessee consistently over the years has to be upheld. 6. In the result the ap…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S LEASE PLAN FLEET MANAGEMENT INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4541/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Circle 4(1), Vs. Lease Plan Fleet Management India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 301, Ca Chambers, 2183-84/62, Naiwala, Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. [Pan: Aaacl 4751A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Ms. Anima Baranwal, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2016 Order Per L.P. Sahu: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-Vii, New Delhi Dated 25.08.2010 For The Assessment Year 2007-08 On The Following Grounds : “1. The Order Of The Learned It(A) Is Erroneous & Contrary To Facts & Law. 2. On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.3,00,88,607/- Made By The Ao By Disallowing The Provisions Directly Debited In The Balance Sheet.

For Appellant: Ms. Anima Baranwal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &
Section 143(3)

…. [2008] 299 ITR 1 (SC); (ii) Bakshi Vikram Vikas Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 61 (Delhi) (Mag.): (iii) IRB Infrastructure Ltd. vs. ITO [2008] 115 ITD 374 (Mum.); and 5 ITA No.4541/Del./2010 (iv) Awadhesh Builders vs. ITO [2010] 37 SOT 122 (Mum). 4.4 Under the facts and circumstances of the case stated above, it is held that the addition of Rs.3,00,88,607/- on account of provision created out of income cannot be sustained and accordingly, the same is directed to be deleted. As a result, Grounds of appeal No. 1 to 2.2 are allowed.” 3. The ld. DR relying upon the assessment order, sub…

ELENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS,NAVI MUMBAI vs. JT.C.I.T. 22(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 199/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 199/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Elenji Kamalil V. Thomas, Jcit – 22(2), बनाम/ 212, Vardhaman Chambers, Navi Mumbai. V. Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aacpe 7339 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43(6)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 199/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Elenji Kamalil V. Thomas, JCIT – 22(2), बनाम/ 212, Vardhaman Chambers, Navi Mumbai. v. Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AACPE 7339 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Prakash Pandit Revenue by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 24-2-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncem…