Conwood Realty P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -Circle-12(1)(2), Mumbai
ITA 727/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Conwood Realty Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Circle-12(1)(2) Yashodham, D.B. House, Gen. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, A.K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 (East), Mumbai – 400063 Pan No. Aadcc2501Q (Assessee) (Revenue) C.O. No. 55/Mum/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 6447/Mum/2019) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Circle-12(1)(2) M/S Conwood Realty Pvt. Ltd. R. No. 128D, 1St Floor, Aayakar Vs. Yashodham, D.B. House, Gen. Bhavan, Churchgate, A.K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon Mumbai 400020 (East), Mumbai – 400063 Pan No. Aadcc2501Q (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A.R Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/10/2021
For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)
…red as part of the construction costs and development costs. In fact, we find that the issue in hand is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. DLF Home Developers Ltd. (2019) 411 ITR 378 (Del). In its aforesaid order the Hon‟ble High Court had observed that as brokerage and commission expenses are not a direct expense for acquiring a specific property but it is in fact a financial cost/selling expense, thus, the same are fully allowable in the year in which they are incurred. For the sake of clarity the relevant observations of t…
