What is Unique Enterprises v. ITO authority for?

A taxpayer following the project completion method of accounting for real estate development can continue to do so, even if AS-7 (revised) might suggest otherwise for contractors, provided the method does not distort or underestimate profits and the project is not substantially complete.

How many judgments cite Unique Enterprises v. ITO?

24 judgments on BharatTax cite Unique Enterprises v. ITO (5 ITD 495), spanning 2016 to 2024.

Unique Enterprises v. ITO (5 ITD 495)

Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-5, Pune vs. Sangam Press Private Limited, Pune

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 674/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.674/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Circle-5, Pune. Vs. Sangam Press Private Limited, 17-B, Sangam House, Sangam Press Road, Pune- 411038. Pan : Aaccs5995B Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Assessee By Shri C. H. Naniwadekar : Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, [In Short The “Cit(A)”] Pune’S Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2023- 24/1060642739(1), Dated 08.02.2024, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 143(3)Section 43C

…g decisions. i) CIT v. Advance Construction Co. P Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 30 (Guj) ii) CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 374 (Delhi) 9 iii) Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd. (193 ITR 694) (Bombay High court) iv) Champions Construction Co. (5 ITD 495) (ITAT Mumbai) v) ITO v. W.D, Estates (P.) Ltd. [1993] 45 ITD 473 (Bom.) 3.10 Further, the contention of the appellant that the percentage of project completion method is not applicable to the facts of the case under appeal is also supported by AS-7, AS-9, Revised Guidelines of 2012 issued by ICAI and also copies of agreements to sale the flats. Th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Pune vs. G K Wonders, Pune

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 25/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Pune24 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None/Ex-parteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43C

…ncome Computation and Disclosure Standard (ICDS) with effect from 01/04/2017. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering decision of Champion Construction Co. Vs First Income-tax Officer (l983) 5 ITD 495 (BOM), while deciding the case of the assesses. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, modify or alter any of the grounds.” 3. Mr. Murkunde next took us to the Ld. CIT(A)'s detailed discussion reversing the assessment findings invoking sec.43CB of the Act and making the impugned addition of Rs.1,97,12,000/- as under : “6.1. Vide this ground of app…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Suresh G. Wadhwa, Navi Mumbai

ITA 5104/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Bledcit, Central Circle – 8(1) V. Shri Suresh G. Wadhwa Room No. 656, 6Th Floor 429, Arneja Corner Sector – 17, Vashi Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 020 Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan: Aaapw0812A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Tiwari : Shri Vijay Kumar Subramanian Department By Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.03.2021

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Tiwari

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…he decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P)Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC). 12. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. Ld. DR relied on the order of the Champion Construction Company v. ITO (1983) 5 ITD 495 (Bom). 13. In reply Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld.DR sought support from the decision of ITAT in the case of Champion Construction Company v. ITO (1983) 5 ITD 495 (Bom) without realising that the reasoning of the Assessing Officer based on occupation certificate has not been accepted by this Tribunal . Even otherwise the decis…

Sohanlal M Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1), Thane

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 5776/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Justin (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…ot presenting the correct , true and fair picture of its taxable profit. The AO relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paints P. Ltd. 188 ITR 44 , BSR Footwear 77 ITR 857 and also decision in the case of Champion Construction 5 ITD 495, Bhagya Nagar Construction 46 ITD 236 , the AO applied percentage completion method. The AO also observed that the assessee has only incurred expenditure of Rs. 2,46,733/- towards purchases during the year under consideration and no other expenditure was incurred towards the cost of the project which led AO to conclude that the project of the asses…

DCIT 23(3), Mumbai vs. Sainath Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 139/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 271(1)(c)

…d that the assessee has under reported its profit by 8.44% and accordingly added the shortfall in profit, which worked out to Rs.42.03 lakhs, to the total income of the assessee. 6. The Ld CIT(A), by placing reliance on the decision of Champion Construction (5 ITD 495)(Mum), took the view that the Gross profit margin should have been compared by the assessing officer. In the above said case, it was held that the gross profit margin of 12% was reasonable. He noticed that the gross profit margin declared by the assessee was 10.30%. Accordingly, the 3 M/s. Sainath Enterprises Ld CIT(A) sustained addition to the ex…

ITO 16(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Matushree Builders & Developers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6178/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6178/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) I.T.O. – 16(2)(2), M/S Matushree Builders & बनाम/ R. No. 214, 2Nd Floor, Developers, V. Matru Mandir, 8-A, Gr. Flr., Tardeo Road, Apollo House, Mumbai – 400 007. B.S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aanfm0260F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri BeharilalFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip

Section 143(3)Section 145

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “B” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6178/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) I.T.O. – 16(2)(2), M/s Matushree Builders & बनाम/ R. No. 214, 2nd floor, Developers, v. Matru Mandir, 8-A, Gr. Flr., Tardeo Road, Apollo House, Mumbai – 400 007. B.S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN :AANFM0260F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Neil Philip Assessee by : Shri Beharilal सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date o…

Layer Exports P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

ITA 3378/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2016AY 2011-12