“percentage completion method”

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Peninsula Land Ltd, Mumbai

Assessee and re-calculated the business income arising from the project „Ashok Towers‟ by following his own method as opposed to the percentage completion method followed which was being consistently followed by the Assessee. The Assessing Officer computed business income, being profit on sale of land

DCIT Cent .Cir-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sunny Vista Realtors Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2012-13

expenses etc. by observing as under:- "11. We have considered rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. The percentage completion method of accounting has ITA No.4579/M/2013 M/s. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd. 8 been regularly followed by the assessee. In the succeeding assessment year

DCIT Cent. Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. K. Raheja Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1970/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19) K. Raheja Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit Central Circle-4(2) Raheja Tower, Plot No. C- Room No.1918, Air India Vs. 30, Oppo. Sidbi, Bandra Building, Nariman Point- Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), 400021. Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2218/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19) Dcit Central Circle-4(2) बिधम/ K. Raheja Pvt. Ltd. Room No.1918, Air India Raheja Tower, Plot No. C-30, Vs. Building, Nariman Point- Oppo. Sidbi, Bandra Kurla 400021. Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack1949H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Smt. Neelam Shukla (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 17/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Cross Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-52, Mumbai Dated 08.09.2021 For The A.Y.2018-19. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: -

crores + 175.15 crores] in place of Rs.660 crores declared by the assessee and accordingly re-worked the profit to be recognized under the percentage completion method in the relevant AY 2018-19 in the following manner: Table 2: Particulars 31,03,2018 (Sq.ft) Total Carpet Area Sq.ft

K Raheja Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir-4(2), `Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1970/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19) K. Raheja Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit Central Circle-4(2) Raheja Tower, Plot No. C- Room No.1918, Air India Vs. 30, Oppo. Sidbi, Bandra Building, Nariman Point- Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), 400021. Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2218/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2018-19) Dcit Central Circle-4(2) बिधम/ K. Raheja Pvt. Ltd. Room No.1918, Air India Raheja Tower, Plot No. C-30, Vs. Building, Nariman Point- Oppo. Sidbi, Bandra Kurla 400021. Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack1949H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Smt. Neelam Shukla (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 17/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Cross Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-52, Mumbai Dated 08.09.2021 For The A.Y.2018-19. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: -

crores + 175.15 crores] in place of Rs.660 crores declared by the assessee and accordingly re-worked the profit to be recognized under the percentage completion method in the relevant AY 2018-19 in the following manner: Table 2: Particulars 31,03,2018 (Sq.ft) Total Carpet Area Sq.ft

Red Hat India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5831/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5833/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5834/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit Cir-15(3)(1), M/S Red Hat India Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, A 201, Supreme Business Park, बनाम/ Mumbai-400 020 Supreme City, Hiranandani Vs. Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7097N (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6034/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6036/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6037/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Red Hat India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Cir-15(3)(1), R. No. 473, Aayakar A 201, Supreme Business बनाम/ Bhavan, New Marine Lines, Park, Supreme City, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 076 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7097N (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

assessee contended that the assessee has recognized revenue from subscription service in its books of account as per the Percentage Completion Method (PCM) prescribed under Accounting Standard-9 (AS-9). Revenue recognition and subscriptions are provided over a period of 1 to 7 years, the amount received from customer ... period to which such subscription relates. It has been claimed that the said practice of recognizing revenue is in accordance with paragraph-? of percentage complete method of AS-9. The assessee has further placed reliance upon the Income Computation and Disclosure Standard (ICDS) issued by the CBDT pursuant to section

Courtyard Real Estate Pvt. Ltd, `Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

Bench: Shri Abyt Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Courtyard Real Estate Private Limited 1St Floor, Windsor, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz East Mumbai-400098 Pan: Aadcr0870K ...... Appellant Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 5(4), Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 ..…Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Jitendra Jain, Ca Respondent By : Shri Shyam Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/07/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As Cit (A)] Vide Order Dated 26.10.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Solitary Issue Disputed In Appeal Is As Under: “1. The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ao In Treating The Interest Income Earned On Fixed Deposits (Fd) Of Rs. 60,49,527/- As “Income From Other Sources” For The Year As Against Reducing The Same From The Total Cost Of Work In Progress. 2. The Appellant Submits That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Interest Income Earned On Fd Of Rs. 60,49,527/- Reduces The Interest Cost On Funds Borrowed For The Project & Thus Has Been Rightly Reduced From The Cost Of Project. 3. Your Appellant Craves Leave To Add, To Alter, Or To Amend The Aforesaid Grounds Of Appeal. 2 M/S Courtyard Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee-Company Is In The Business Of Real Estates Development & Construction. It Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2017- 18 On 30.3.2018 Declaring Income For The Year At Rs. 56,72,910/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Was Constructing A Residential Project At Pokhran Road No 2, Thane. It Was Following Percentage Completion Method (Pcm) Of Accounting For Revenue Recognition.

During the year under consideration, the assessee was constructing a residential Project at Pokhran Road No 2, Thane. It was following Percentage Completion Method (PCM) of accounting for Revenue Recognition. 3. The assessee’s case has been selected for scrutiny assessment. During the course of assessment proceeding, the AO observed

Dy CIT 10 (3)91), Mumbai vs. M/S Nouveau Developers Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for AY

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 8047/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-10(3)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Nouveau Developers Pvt. 1St Room No.217/212, Ltd. Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 701, Natraj, M. V. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Junction, Western Express 400020. Highway, Andheri East, Mumbai-400072. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 7039/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2014-15) बिधम/ Dcit-10(3)(1) M/S. Nouveau Developers Pvt. Room No.212, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, M. K. 702, Natraj, M. V. Road, Road Churchgate, Junction, Western Express Mumbai-400020. Highway, Andheri East, Mumbai-400069. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccn5280G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Dr. Pratap Narayan Sharma (Sr.Ar) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Of The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-17, Mumbai Dated 24.10.2019 For A.Y.2013-14; & Order Dated 07.09.2018 For Ay.2014-15. 2. First We Deal With Appeal Pertaining To Ay. 2013-14 Wherein Ground No. 1 Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Reversing The Action Of The Ao Capitalizing Rs.2,47,96,353/- Which

secured A.Ys.2014-15 & 2013-14 Nouveau Developers Pvt. Ltd. loans, unsecured loans, processing charged and bank charges. The appellant is following the percentage completion method of accounting the income and expenses. I find that appellant has himself capitalised interest amounting to Rs. 40,06,934/- out of the total ... heard both the parties and perused the records. We note that the assessee is a builder & real estate developer and is following the percentage completion method of accounting the income and expenditure. The assessee has claimed interest expenditure (Rs.2,47,96,353/-) in its P & L account and capitalized interest

DCIT - 10 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Nouveau Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for AY

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 8047/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-10(3)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Nouveau Developers Pvt. 1St Room No.217/212, Ltd. Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 701, Natraj, M. V. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Junction, Western Express 400020. Highway, Andheri East, Mumbai-400072. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 7039/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2014-15) बिधम/ Dcit-10(3)(1) M/S. Nouveau Developers Pvt. Room No.212, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, M. K. 702, Natraj, M. V. Road, Road Churchgate, Junction, Western Express Mumbai-400020. Highway, Andheri East, Mumbai-400069. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccn5280G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Dr. Pratap Narayan Sharma (Sr.Ar) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/06/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Of The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-17, Mumbai Dated 24.10.2019 For A.Y.2013-14; & Order Dated 07.09.2018 For Ay.2014-15. 2. First We Deal With Appeal Pertaining To Ay. 2013-14 Wherein Ground No. 1 Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Reversing The Action Of The Ao Capitalizing Rs.2,47,96,353/- Which

secured A.Ys.2014-15 & 2013-14 Nouveau Developers Pvt. Ltd. loans, unsecured loans, processing charged and bank charges. The appellant is following the percentage completion method of accounting the income and expenses. I find that appellant has himself capitalised interest amounting to Rs. 40,06,934/- out of the total ... heard both the parties and perused the records. We note that the assessee is a builder & real estate developer and is following the percentage completion method of accounting the income and expenditure. The assessee has claimed interest expenditure (Rs.2,47,96,353/-) in its P & L account and capitalized interest

DCIT Circle- 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

action of the AO in recomputing the Long Term Capital Gain on sale of land recognized by the appellant based on the percentage completion method on land converted into stock-in-trade at Rs.1,66,88,61,759/- instead of Rs.1,58,10,39,854/- as offered by the Appellant ... No.2799/M/2019 28. The assessee has offered Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) to the tune of Rs.1,48,68,37,792/- by applying the percentage completion method and by taking indexation till the year of sale. However, AO by disagreeing with the assessee proceeded to hold that the assessee

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

action of the AO in recomputing the Long Term Capital Gain on sale of land recognized by the appellant based on the percentage completion method on land converted into stock-in-trade at Rs.1,66,88,61,759/- instead of Rs.1,58,10,39,854/- as offered by the Appellant ... No.2799/M/2019 28. The assessee has offered Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) to the tune of Rs.1,48,68,37,792/- by applying the percentage completion method and by taking indexation till the year of sale. However, AO by disagreeing with the assessee proceeded to hold that the assessee

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

action of the AO in recomputing the Long Term Capital Gain on sale of land recognized by the appellant based on the percentage completion method on land converted into stock-in-trade at Rs.1,66,88,61,759/- instead of Rs.1,58,10,39,854/- as offered by the Appellant ... No.2799/M/2019 28. The assessee has offered Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) to the tune of Rs.1,48,68,37,792/- by applying the percentage completion method and by taking indexation till the year of sale. However, AO by disagreeing with the assessee proceeded to hold that the assessee

M/S. Anand Projects Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-2, Mumbai

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Anand Projects Limited V. Pr.Cit – 2 19/3, Sujata Building Room No. 344, 3Rd Floor Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400097 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaact1389G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Shah Department By : Smt Shailaja Rai

relevant assessment year, the assessee has shown advance received from Contract amounting to Rs 632.75 crore, as Current Liability based on percentage completion method prescribed as per AS-7.” “The assessee object to para 2 of Notice which state that as per contract, the total project cost is Rs.2057.32 crores ... revised contracts. However, the advance receipt has been shown as current liability in the Balance Sheet. Moreover, the assessee was admittedly following percentage completion method for revenue recognition as specified in AS 7 consistently. It was further noted by the Ld. Pr.CIT that a crucial fact now admitted by assessee

Tata Housing Development Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ITA

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Tata Housing Vs. Dcit – 8(3)(1) Development Company Room No. 615, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Aayakar Bhavan, Compound, Tb Kadam Mk Marg, Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent Dcit – 8(3)(1) Vs. M/S. Tata Housing Room No. 615, Aayakar Development Company Bhavan, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Mk Marg, Compound, Tb Kadam Mumbai – 400020. Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent

loaded to the project. The sums borrowed are utilized on various projects under constructions. We mention here that the appellant follows Percentage Completion Method (%CM') in its books of accounts while it files its return of income on Completed Contract Method ('CCM') regularly since inception. This method of accounting ... erred in overlooking the facts that the assessee is engaged in the business of construction and development works and following the percentage completion method (PCM). Further, the assessee has not anticipated that there will be increase in income due to merger of entities and therefore the interest

Jt. CIT (OSD), CC-7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Andhra Expressway Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1588/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1589/Mum/2021 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Jcit (Osd), Cc-7(2), M/S Andhra Expressway Ltd. R. No. 655, Aayakar बनाम/ Ground Floor, Gammon Bhavan, M. K. Road, House, Veer Savarkar Vs. Mumbai-400020 Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aadca3577E (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Smt. Shailja Rai, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ld. Ar : सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 01.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 24.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Impugned Order Of Even Date 29.06.2021, Passed By 2

recognition on contracts Contract prices are either fixed or subject to price escalation clause. Revenue from contracts is recognized on the basis of percentage completion method, and the level of completion depends on the nature and type of each contract including : Unbilled work-in-progress valued at lower of cost

M/S. First Light Properties P. Ltd.(Earstwhile Known As M/S. Sumer Builders P. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. The DCIT, CC, 5(3), Mumbai

In the result ground of appeal raised by assessee is dismissed and stand of AO is confirmed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S First Light Properties Pvt. Ltd. (Erstwhile Known As M/S Sumer Builders Pvt. Ltd.) 205, Commerce House, 140, Nagindas Master Road, For, Mumbai-400023 Pan: Aaacs7947P ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit, Cc-5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Nishit Gandhi Respondent By : Sh. Sandip Raj, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/06/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

interest expenditure has been incurred in respect of the ongoing real estate project. The appellant has not clarified whether it is following a percentage completion method or completed contract method to recognize the revenue. The appellant itself has been debiting these expenditure in the work-in progress. In these circumstances

DCIT Cen Cir 8(3), Mumbai vs. Lokhandwala Infrasatructure P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 236/Mum/2015 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Lokhandwala Dcit Cen. Cir.– 8(3), Infrastructurepvt. Ltd. R. No. 659, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ 54A, Jindal Mansion, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400 020 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaace1568L (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By Smt. Shailja Rai, Ld. Dr : प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Mani Jain, Ld. Ars सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 01.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Impugned Order Dated 28.08.2014, Passed By Ld. Cit (Appeals)-38, Mumbai For The Quantum Appeal Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3)

noted that, assessee had 8 I.T.A. No. 236/Mum/2015 M/s Lokhandwala InfrastructurePvt. Ltd. offered income from projects on percentage completion method and has recognized revenue for 3 projects, namely, i) Lokhandwala Residency Project, ii) Empress Court Project & iii) Kohinoor Project. However, the assessee had debited an amount of Rs.9 ... expenses on both these projects and claimed these 9 I.T.A. No. 236/Mum/2015 M/s Lokhandwala InfrastructurePvt. Ltd. expenses against the profit shown as per percentage completion method. Ld. AO held that following expenses were required to be capitalized by the assessee, which are as under:- Description of Victoria Project Andheri Kurla

Dosti Reality Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle, 1(1) (1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 157/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit Circle-1(1)(1), Dosti Realty Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 1St Floor, Lawrence & Mayo Road, Mumbai-400 020 House, 276, Dr. D. N. Road, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaccs0746E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rahul Hakani, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ajay Chandra, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 07.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 27.12.2021, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Relation To Order Passed U/S 144C

revenue expenditure. Without prejudice, further in para 3.10 of your order you have worked out income of Rs.34,73,72,263/- on percentage completion method as profit of the project of the Financial Year 2014-15 i.e. assessment year 2015-16. On going through the working we find that