Wall Street Construction Ltd. v. JCIT

101 ITD 156Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#4588 most cited

What is Wall Street Construction Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Deducting interest expenditure allocated project-wise and added to work-in-progress against income from other completed projects distorts profit calculation according to the project completion method.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Wall Street Construction Ltd. · section 36(1)(iii) · interest expenditure · project completion method · distortion of profits · work-in-progress · WIP · accounting method

Also reported as

115 TTJ 139

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(ii)project completion methodpercentage completion methodsection 57(iii)disallowance of interest expendituresection 36(1)(iii)section 57put to usesection 36(1)capital expendituresection 36income from other sources

Judgments citing Wall Street Construction Ltd. v. JCIT

Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai vs. ACIT 24(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 6977/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6977/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4198/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6978/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6979/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4199/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4200/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2013-14) Laxmi Industrial Estate Acit-31(2) बनाम/ 99, Prabhu Niwas Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Room No.708 Jawahar Nagar, Road No.15 Vs. C-11, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 051. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafl-1382-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Reepal Tralshawala –Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Satish Chandra Rajore-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Reepal Tralshawala –Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rajore-Ld. DR

…ould include related costs including interest cost also. The judgments relied upon by the assessee were distinguished on factual matrix. Rather reliance was placed on the decision of Special Bench of Tribunal rendered in Wall Street Construction Ltd. V/s JCIT 101 ITD 156 to arrive at conclusion that interest identifiable with the project should be allowed in the year when the project was completed and corresponding income from that project was offered for taxation. 3.2 The plea of consistency was rejected at para 5.3 by observing as under: - 5.3 As regards the claim of the assessee that it is following the same m…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(2), Mumbai vs. Hiranandnani Palace Gardens P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4392/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri B. Srinivas, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Chetan Karia &
Section 145A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent 4392/Mum/16 2008-09 M/s. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. DCIT, Ltd., Central Circle-1(2), 514, Dalamal Towers, 4393/Mum/16 2010-11 MUMBAI FPJ Marg, Nariman Point, MUMBAI 4394/Mum/16 2011-12 [PAN: AACCC8862H] Appellant by : Shri B. Srinivas, CIT-DR Respondent by : Shri Chetan Karia & Smt. Swati H. Patrawala, ARs Date of Hearing : 12-07-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 03-10-2019 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, A.M: These appeals filed by…

M/S.Runwal Projects Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5620/MUM/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)

…the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Advance Construction Co Pvt Ltd (2005) 275 ITRE 30 (Guj). The Ld.AR relied upon the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench in the case of Wall Street Construction Ltd & Others vs JCIT (2006) 101 ITD 156 (Mum)(SB). 8. On the other hand, the Ld.DR strongly supporting the order of the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the assessee itself has quantified undisclosed 15 ITA 7160/Mum/2017 income on account of receipts of on-money from sale of flat and such admission has been re-iterated by filing a letter during the course of assessment proceedings on 23-09-…

Sunny Vista Realtors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4580/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.4580/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sunny Vista Realtors Pvt Ltd vs The ACIT, Cir.3(3), Mumbai 514, Dalamal Towers, 211, FDPJ Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 PAN : AAKCS1269E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Chetan Karia Respondent by Shri Sunil K Jha Date of hearing : 15-12-2016 Date of order : 11 -01-2017 O R D E R Per ASHWANI TANEJA, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (A…

Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 4579/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Hiranandani Palace The Assistant Commissioner Of Gardens P. Ltd., Income Tax (Osd), 514 Dalamal Towers, 211 Fpj Circle -3(1), Vs. Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaccc 8862H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Chetan Karia, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2015

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal, D.R
Section 234B

…y expenses, administrative expenses and selling expenses as revenue expenditure. The Ld. counsel has further contended that the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal relied upon by the lower authorities in the case of “Wall Street Construction Ltd. Vs JCIT” [101 ITD 156] is relating to interest expenditure identifiable with the project. In assessee’s case, dispute is not with respect to interest as the assessee itself has added the interest cost to the work-in-progress and claimed it in subsequent year in the proportion of revenue offered. Thus, the facts in assessee’s case are quite distinguishable and the deci…