Sandhu Builders, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai
In the result, all all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes
ITA 2002/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014
Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sandhu Builders, Acit-19(3), Sandhu Palace, 41, Pali Hill, Matru Mandir Tardeo, Bandra (W), Vs. Mumbai-400034. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaxfs 4480 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Vipul Joshi, Adv./S.K. Desai Revenue By : Mr. Vinay Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 20/02/2023
For Appellant: Mr. Vipul Joshi, Adv./S.K. DesaiFor Respondent: Mr. Vinay Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)
…arliest point of time. The same is clarified in decision in T.N.K. Govindarajulu Chetty v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR decision in T.N.K. Govindarajulu Chetty v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR decision in T.N.K. Govindarajulu Chetty v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 22 (Mad), affirmed in (1987) 165 ITR 231 22 (Mad), affirmed in (1987) 165 ITR 231 (SC). We have stated in the impugned order that as the assessee We have stated in the impugned order that as the assessee We have stated in the impugned order that as the assessee is following consistently percentage completion method, is following consistently percentage completion method, is following co…
