CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd.

440 ITR 343High Court2020#5894 most cited

What is CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot reject accounts under section 145(3) solely on the grounds that the assessee, a builder and developer, followed the completed contract method instead of the percentage completion method mandated by AS-7.

20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. · section 145(3) · completed contract method · percentage completion method · AS-7 · builders and developers · rejection of accounts · accounting method

Also reported as

116 Taxmann.com 554

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 263 Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 145(1)section 211 section 2(7)section 132(2)section 23a section 132(1)(a)section 153(a)(1)retention money project completion method section 250(1)section 45(2)section 145(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd.

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…al question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” (emphasis supplied) ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others 43. Reliance may be placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) (refer Page 445-450 of Paper Book Vol-2). The assessee being engaged in the business of builders and developers, followed completed contract method for all its real estate projects. While the revenue did not accept the same on the ground that provisions of Accounting Standard AS-7 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 714/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…al question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” (emphasis supplied) ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others 43. Reliance may be placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) (refer Page 445-450 of Paper Book Vol-2). The assessee being engaged in the business of builders and developers, followed completed contract method for all its real estate projects. While the revenue did not accept the same on the ground that provisions of Accounting Standard AS-7 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 713/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…al question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” (emphasis supplied) ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others 43. Reliance may be placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) (refer Page 445-450 of Paper Book Vol-2). The assessee being engaged in the business of builders and developers, followed completed contract method for all its real estate projects. While the revenue did not accept the same on the ground that provisions of Accounting Standard AS-7 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…al question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” (emphasis supplied) ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others 43. Reliance may be placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) (refer Page 445-450 of Paper Book Vol-2). The assessee being engaged in the business of builders and developers, followed completed contract method for all its real estate projects. While the revenue did not accept the same on the ground that provisions of Accounting Standard AS-7 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 676/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…al question of law is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.” (emphasis supplied) ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others 43. Reliance may be placed on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) (refer Page 445-450 of Paper Book Vol-2). The assessee being engaged in the business of builders and developers, followed completed contract method for all its real estate projects. While the revenue did not accept the same on the ground that provisions of Accounting Standard AS-7 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountants of India was…

DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2585/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Dlf Home Developers Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, 9Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Sansad Delhi-1, Marg, New Delhi-110001. New Delhi Pan-Aaccd0037H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.S.Singhvi, Ca & Shri Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Shri Surender Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 263

…the decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manish Buildwell Private Limited reported in 16 taxmann.com 27 (Del HC) ; decision of Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects Pvt Ltd reported in 440 ITR 343 (Kar.) ; and decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Paras Buildtech India Pvt. Ltd reported in 382 ITR 630 (Del). The ld NFAC also gave a categorical finding of reversal of excess revenues, which was booked in earlier years of ₹609185.90 lakhs which was claimed as a one time claim of deduction during the year under considera…

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

…result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 41 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 55. (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both w…

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

…result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 41 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 55. (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both w…

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

…result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 41 AND ITA.1155/Del/2009 & ITA.5067/Del/2013 AND C. O. No. 55/Del/2014 Sahara India Power Corporation Ltd., Pune In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 55. (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both w…

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

…e case of CIT v. Banjara Developers & Constructions P, Ltd. reported in 425 ITR 673. Reliance is further placed on the decisions of various courts in the following cases in support of the contention of the assessee: • CIT vs. Prestige Estate Projects Pvt Ltd, 440 ITR 343 (Kar) • CIT vs. Varun Developers, 440 ITR 354 (Kar) • CIT vs. S. N. Builders & Developers. 431 ITR 241 (Kar) • DCIT vs. Esteem Classic, ITA No.842 of 2018 dated 22.03.2021 (Kar) M/s. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 8 of 32 5.9 The ld. A.R. submitted that the authorities below failed to appreciate that whether t…

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

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 16.14 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

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 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

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

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 16.14 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

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 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

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

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 16.14 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 8.15 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 8.15 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…question of law framed by this court is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 8.15 In the case of CIT Vs. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. 440 ITR 343 (Karn.) wherein held that “10. In the instant case, assessee entered into a Development Agreement with M/s. Karnataka Realtors Private Limited, under which agreement the assessee was to develop the property and after development of the property, the owner and the developer were entitled to a specified percentage of super built area and both were…

M/S. EMBASSY KNOWLEDGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 982/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjay Kumar S.R., CIT –DR

Section 143(2)Section 24Section 3

…or profession". These decisions have been rendered by following the judgement in CIT Vs Velankani Information Systems Ltd 35 Taxmann.com 1) a CIT v. Information Technology Park Pvt Ltd 46 Taxmann.com 239 (Kar) [Para 6] b.CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd 116 Taxmann.com 554 (Kar) [Para 13] c.Rao Computer Consultants P. Ltd v. DCIT 128 Taxmann.com 292(Kar) [Para 4] d.CIT v. Mis. Toyota Techno Park. India P. Ltd (ITA No. 30 of 2009) dated 18.03.2014 [Para 6] 2.l.13. It is further submitted that the department has assessed the income for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 under the head "Income from house…

PR.COMMISSIONER vs. M/S. ESTEEM CLASSIC

In the result, the appeals preferred by the Revenue

ITA/844/2018HC Karnataka22 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 260Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL I.T.A. NO.842 OF 2018 CONNECTED WITH I.T.A. NO.843 OF 2018 I.T.A. NO.844 OF 2018 IN I.A.No.842 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. Pr. Commissioner Income Tax – 6 BMTC Complex Koramangala Bangalore. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle – 1[4] Bengaluru. ... Appellants (By Sri. Sanmathi E.I. - Advocate) 2 AND: M/s. Esteem Classic Unit Nos.32, 33 & 34 3rd floor…

PR.COMMISSIONER vs. M/S. ESTEEM CLASSIC

In the result, the appeals preferred by the Revenue

ITA/843/2018HC Karnataka22 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 260Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL I.T.A. NO.842 OF 2018 CONNECTED WITH I.T.A. NO.843 OF 2018 I.T.A. NO.844 OF 2018 IN I.A.No.842 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. Pr. Commissioner Income Tax – 6 BMTC Complex Koramangala Bangalore. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle – 1[4] Bengaluru. ... Appellants (By Sri. Sanmathi E.I. - Advocate) 2 AND: M/s. Esteem Classic Unit Nos.32, 33 & 34 3rd floor…

THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S S N BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA/393/2014HC Karnataka07 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 133ASection 260Section 5Section 80I

…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.393 OF 2014 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1) UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. .... APPELLANTS (BY MR. K.V. ARAVIND, 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-560 076. ... RESPONDENT (BY…

CIT v. Prestige Estate Projects P. Ltd. (440 ITR 343) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax