CIT v. Aditya Builders
378 ITR 75High Court2015#5581 most cited
What is CIT v. Aditya Builders authority for?
The appropriate method of accounting to correctly reflect a true financial statement is a matter of opinion and debate, which is not amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. The Assessing Officer cannot change the method of revenue recognition to the percentage completion method if the assessee has consistently followed the project completion method.
21
judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.
Also referred to as
CIT v. Aditya Builders · CIT v Aditya Builders · 378 ITR 75 · section 263 · revisional jurisdiction · accounting method · project completion method · percentage completion method · revenue recognition · AO jurisdiction
Also reported as
158 Taxmann 61