How many judgments cite CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd.?

58 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. (245 CTR 397), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 69, Section 153A, Section 69A, Section 147.

CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd.

245 CTR 397High Court2011#1961 most cited

What is CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. authority for?

The production of fresh evidence at the appellate stage before the Commissioner (Appeals) is strictly governed by the conditions and procedures laid down in Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. · 245 CTR 397 · Delhi High Court · Rule 46A Income-tax Rules · additional evidence · fresh evidence · appellate stage · appeal to CIT(A) · Section 250 · evidence production · evidence admissibility

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 69 Section 153A Section 69A Section 147 Section 148 Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 145(1)section 150(2)section 110 section 2(7)section 132(2)section 132(1)(a)section 153(a)(1)section 106 section 250(1)section 45(2)project completion method section 150(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI, I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI vs. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITED, NEHRU PLACE, DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4055/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwaldcit, Circle-4(2) Vs. Continental Construction Room No. 384, C.R. Limited, 28-29, Building, Ip Estate, Continental House, Nehru New Delhi – 110002 Place, New Delhi – 110019 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacc2309R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 69

…ces and those evidences cannot be accepted without giving an opportunity to the AO to verify the same under Rule 46A of the IT Rules and reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Manish Build Well Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Delhi). 5. However, after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case it comes up that although the assessment was ex-parte. However, at First Appellate stage it was pointed out that appellant had responded to the Assessing Officer submitting that there are moving an application to Commissioner to condone the delay as the…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-I NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S RUDRA BUILDWELL HOMES PVT. LTD., DELHI

Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4119/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwaldy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit, M/S Rudra Buildwell Projects Central Circle-I, Private Limited, Noida-201301, Vs. D-53, Okhla, Phase-1, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaecr9589E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…of assessee e) 1993) 69 TAXMAN 499 (RAJ.) HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHANSilver and Art Palacev. Commissioner of Income-tax f) Commissioner of Income-tax, Central-l vs. Manish Build Well (P.) Ltd. [2011] 16 taxmann.com 27 (Delhi)/[2012] 204 Taxman 106 (Delhi)/[2011] 245 CTR 397 (Delhi) (15-11-2011] g)2021 (4) TM) 1033 DELHI HIGH COURT Other Citation: [2021] 435 ITR 85 (Del) International Tractors Ltd Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU) &Anr. h) 2015 (4) TMI 940-BOMBAY HIGH COURT Rallis India Limited Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) -XXI, Mumbai and Others i) [1998] 100 TAXMAN 404 (BOM.) HIGH COURT OF…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR vs. BIRI KAKUM, ESS SECTOR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 170/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: The Ld. Ao. The Ld. Ao Was Not Satisfied With The Response Given By The Assessee & Made The Impugned Addition With The Following Finding:

Section 10(26)Section 145(3)Section 250

…by books of account, bank statements, tax audit report, and other documentary evidence, and merely because the receipts were not traceable in Form 26AS or supported by TDS certificates, the same could not be denied. In CIT v. Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. [(2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del)], the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that non-appearance in 26AS or lack of TDS cannot be the sole basis for denial of income or exemption where books of accounts and books are not reliable or rejected u/s 145(3), such an addition based only on 26AS mismatch is not sustainable. In view of the above discussion, Ground No. 3 is allowed. 8. In…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal • After thought and reasonable time both are easily distinguishable as per human probability test. • Fresh evidence at appellate stage is subject to Rule 46A of the IT Rules. Citation: • CIT v. Manish Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del) 7. Principles of Natural Justice • Revenue has provided opportunities to the assessee through notices and document copies. • Failure to respond is not a breach of natural justice. Citation: • Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (2015) 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC) And when assessee fails to point out violation natural justice it must demonstrate…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 498/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…ng assessment proceedings.\n• After thought and reasonable time both are easily distinguishable as per\nhuman probability test.\n• Fresh evidence at appellate stage is subject to Rule 46A of the IT Rules.\nCitation:\n• CIT v. Manish Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del)\n\n7. Principles of Natural Justice\n• Revenue has provided opportunities to the assessee through notices and\ndocument copies.\n• Failure to respond is not a breach of natural justice.\nCitation:\n• Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (2015) 62 taxmann.com 3 (SC)\nAnd when assessee fails to point out violation natural justice it must demonstr…

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 497/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 496/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 493/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

ITA 706/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…rking, club\nmembership and development charges for determining the actual sale consideration in\nrespect of the flats. Reliance is placed on the decisions in CIT v. Kantilal Prabhudas Patel\n(2008) 296 ITR 568 (MP) and CIT v. Manish Buildwell (p) ltd. (2011) 245 CTR 397\n(del) to underscore the point that the additions cannot be made on guess work or\nestimates.\n74\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\n9.No proper verification of regular books of account vis-à-vis so called incriminating\ndocuments.\n10. The search action was initiated in the early morning and departmental offic…

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. AXWELL GRANITO PVT. LTD., MORBI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 491/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri K.L. Solanki, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 68

…A) are co-terminus with the AO and the Id. CIT(A) had all the plenary powers as that of the AO. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Manish Build Well (P.) Ltd. reported in [2011] Axwell Granito Pvt. Ltd. 16 taxmann.com 27/245 CTR 397/[2012] 204 Taxman 106 (Delhi) has held that the CIT(A) is statutory first appellate authority and has independent power of examination of evidences and possesses co-terminus power of assessment apart from appellate powers. Based on these facts and circumstances, we dismiss the ground No.2 raised by the revenue. 13. In the result, appeal filed by…

DCIT, CIRCLE -6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. ASCENT BUILDHOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED, ADARSH NAGAR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 846/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Jitendra Wadhwa, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…by the Ld.\nCIT(A), bypassing Rule 46A requirements due to non-submission of the AO's\nreport, constitutes a violation of procedural principles.\n3. Relevant Case Laws Supporting the Requirements of Natural Justice\ni. CIT v. Manish Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 245 CTR 397 (Delhi HC):\nThis case held that \"admitting additional evidence without providing the AO an\nopportunity to examine it violates Rule 46A and principles of natural justice.\" The\nappellate authority is obligated to remand the evidence to the AO for verification to\nprevent prejudice to the Revenue.\nii. Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [(19…

ITO, W-6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SHRINIWAS SHARMA, JAIPUR

19. In view of the above findings, this appeal filed by the Revenue deserves to be dismissed, and, accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed

ITA 3/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Saraswat, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Nargas, (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o aJh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 03/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke The ITO, Shriniwas Sharma Vs. Ward-6(4), Room No. 320, NCR Building, Jaipur. Statue Circle, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ANUPS1642M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : Shri Praveen Saraswat, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Reve…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(2)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KUMAR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue as well as Cross

ITA 3248/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassistant Commissioner Of Vs. Kumar Properties Private Income Tax – 1(2)(1) Limited, 21, Woudboy Room No. 535, 5 Th Floor, Road, Hazarimal Somani Aayakar Bhawan, New Marg, Opp. Mumbai Marine Line, M.K. Road, Gymkhana, Fort – Mumbai- 400020 400001 Maharashtra – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aabck8464E Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No.13/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Rajan Vora a/wFor Respondent: P.D. Chougule

Section 143(2)Section 145(1)

…e recognition to percentage completion method where the assessee has been constantly following the project completion method for recognition of revenue: 1. CIT Vs. Aditya Builders (2017) 378 ITR 75 (Bom HC) 2. CIT vs. Manish Build Well Pvt Lid Vs. CIT (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del) 3. CIT Vs Hill View Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2013) 81 taxmanın.com 58 (P&H HC) 4. PCIT vs Salarpuria Simplex Dwelling LLP (2022) 455 ITR 712 (Cal HC) 5. Rema Country Holdings Ltd. [2012] 18 taxmann.com 184 (Karnataka HC) 6. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Private Limited vs DCIT [2023] (ITA No 1006/Bang/2022) (Bang ITAT)” On the oth…

M/S. S.R. FERRO ALLOYS,JHABUA vs. THE PCIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 148/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanis.R. Ferro Alloys Pr. Cit, Central 9, Siddheswar Colony Bhopal Vs. Jhabua (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Abhfs7377Q Appellant By Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.11.2023

Section 263

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That Ashoka Hi-Tech Builders Pvt.Ltd ITA Page 20 of 55 SR Ferro Alloys Page 21 of 55 No.121/Ind/2016 &686/Ind/2016 it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in deferment of payment of taxes. The…

M/S PARTH DEVELOPERS,DHAR vs. THE PCIT -1, INDORER

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 419/IND/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Parth Developers Pr. Cit-1 Manawar Dist. Indore Vs. Dhar (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aalfp 4509 N Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43C

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That Ashoka Hi-Tech Builders Pvt.Ltd ITA No.121/Ind/2016 &686/Ind/2016 it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in deferment of payment of taxes. Therefore, considering the discussion above, I…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD., PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 5067/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in 57 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune deferment of payment of taxes.…

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 1155/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in 57 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune deferment of payment of taxes.…

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 109/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in 57 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune deferment of payment of taxes.…

M/S. CORPORATE LEISURE & PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA 1053/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K., D.R

…the most appropriate method of accounting to correctly reflect the true financial statement is a matter of opinion and debate, Issues of debate are not amenable to the revisional jurisdiction under section 263.” (ii) CIT v. Manish Build Well (P.) Ltd. (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del.) wherein held that: “It is well settled that the project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. In CIT v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. [2007] 291 1TR 482 / 161 Taxman 191 (SC) the Supreme Court held as follows:- "Lastly, there is a concept in accounts which is called the concept of contract accounts. Under th…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 1 SC, the Apex Court held that the completion contract method adopted by the assessee for chit discount consistently over the years, is not required to be substituted by percentage completion method. In CIT v Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd (2011) 245 CTR 397 (Del), it was enunciated that project completion method is one of the recognized methods of accounting. That it cannot be said that the project completion method followed by the assessee would result in deferment of payment of taxes. Therefore, considering the discussion above, I do not find any merit on the part of the AO to have worked out the…

Showing 1–20 of 58 · Page 1 of 3