“percentage completion method”

Ganga Estate Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward-3(2), Kalyan

In the result, appeal of the assessee for both the Assessment Years are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate development. Assessee filed its return on 31.10.2017, reporting total income at Rs.930/-. Assessee follows percentage completion method for recognition of its revenue from construction of real estate projects. During the year under consideration, assessee was developing a project namely, “Omkar Heights ... factual aspects not considered which when considered would eventually give a correct portray of the profit/(loss) from the said project by applying percentage completion method. The correct position which emerges is a loss scenario in both the Assessment Years. It is important to note that ld. CIT(A) himself

Relationship Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Relationship Properties Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax, Circle 2(3)(1), 41-44, Sp Centre, Minoo V Mumbai Desai Marg, Colaba, S Mumbai – 400005. Pan/Gir No. Aadcr8947D (Appellant) : (Respondent)

profits are recognised when the revenue recognition process is completed; and 37 Relationship Properties Private Limited vs. DCIT, Circle-2(3)(1), Mumbai • Percentage completion method for recognising revenue, costs and profits from transactions and activities of real estate which have the same economic substance as construction contracts ... seller’s obligation, revenue should not be recognised till such time legal title is validly transferred to the buyer. 5. Application of Percentage Completion Method 5.1 The percentage completion method should be applied in the accounting of all real estate transactions/activities in the situations described in paragraph 3.3 above

DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai vs. Amardeep Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri. Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri. Anikesh Banerjeedcit, Central Circle -1(3), Mumbai Amardeep Constructions Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha 7/08, Patidar Complex, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Kannamwar Nagar No. 2, Near 400020 Vikas High School Vikhroli East, Mumbai 400083 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaufa3513A (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररतीकीओरसे/ Assessee By: Shri. J.P. Bairagra& Ms. Rupa Nanda /Revenue By: Shri. Surendra Mohan (Sr. Dr)

real estate developer which was also clarify by Expert advisory committee of ICAI in one of the opinions.The revised AS-7 prescribes only percentage completion method for recognition of revenue. However, said revised AS-7 is not applicable on real estate developers which was also clarified by Expert Advisory Committee ... completion method of accounting as under. As per working in the above chart, the profit for A.Y. 2020-21 on the basis of percentage completion method is Rs. 13,67,96,960/. Later on, the AO issued a show cause notice to the appellant on 20.09.2022, asking

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Sheth Realtors, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

Ground nos.1 to 6 taken together deal with change in the method of accounting followed by the assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer had applied percentage completion method instead of project completion method for computing business income from real estate project undertaken by the assessee. Second issue is through ground no.7, whereby ... assessee was accepted i.e., project completion method. 4.3. In the year under consideration i.e. AY 2017-18, ld. Assessing Officer applied percentage completion method in terms of provisions of section 43CB which was introduced by Finance Act, 2018 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2017. Ld. Assessing Officer held that assessee

Sheth Realtors, Mumbai vs. ITO-7(1) (Erstwhile ITO-23(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Sheth Realtors Income-Tax Officer-7(1) Vasant Oasis, Site Office, [Erstwhile Ito-23(3)(3)] Upper Basement, Mumbai Cts No 345A 1 To 3, Vs. 345A 5 To 6, Makwana Road, Marol, Andheri East., Mumbai – 400059 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Sheth Realtors Income-Tax, Central Circle 12Th Floor, Hallmark Business 7(1), Vs. Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg Mumbai Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [Pan: Aavfa3975F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Advocate & Shri Rahul Hakani, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) 49, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- Assessment Year 2017-18 25/1075205796(1), Dated 28.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, Ward-23(3)(3), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 30.12.2019 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee & Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: I. Ita No. 2712/Mum/2025 [Assessee]

Ground nos.1 to 6 taken together deal with change in the method of accounting followed by the assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer had applied percentage completion method instead of project completion method for computing business income from real estate project undertaken by the assessee. Second issue is through ground no.7, whereby ... assessee was accepted i.e., project completion method. 4.3. In the year under consideration i.e. AY 2017-18, ld. Assessing Officer applied percentage completion method in terms of provisions of section 43CB which was introduced by Finance Act, 2018 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2017. Ld. Assessing Officer held that assessee

ACIT-27(1), Mumbai vs. Gammon Neelkanth Realty Corporation, Mumbai

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

deleting the profit estimated at 5% of advance received from customers by the assessee on the ground that the assessee is following percentage completion method. 2. Brief facts pertaining to AY 2010-11. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of development of property. The assessee filed ... received advances from the buyers who have booked the balance 254 flats. Since the assessee is required to offer revenue by following percentage completion method of accounting the AO called on the assessee to explain why during the year under consideration the assessee has not offered any income. The assessee

ACIT 27(1), Mumbai vs. Gammon Neelkanth Realty Corporation, Mumbai

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

deleting the profit estimated at 5% of advance received from customers by the assessee on the ground that the assessee is following percentage completion method. 2. Brief facts pertaining to AY 2010-11. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of development of property. The assessee filed ... received advances from the buyers who have booked the balance 254 flats. Since the assessee is required to offer revenue by following percentage completion method of accounting the AO called on the assessee to explain why during the year under consideration the assessee has not offered any income. The assessee