percentage completion method — 467 case laws

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1 Udaipur, Udaipur

ITA 708/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2015-16

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

ignored. 2.3 The ld. CIT(A) stated that the argument of the appellant is that unbilled sale is the difference because of following percentage completion method as per accounting standard. If this is true, then the appellant should have shown that the total amount of sale ... over the years from the project and because of following the percentage completion method there are differences in the figures of sale booked in different years. However, it is evident that the appellant has not made any effort in this regard. In the absence of complete reconciliation, the claim

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT- Central Circle-1 Udiapur, Udaipue

ITA 707/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

Udaipur. 2.3 The ld. CIT(A) stated that the argument of the appellant is that unbilled sale is the difference because of following percentage completion method as per accounting standard. If this is true, then the appellant should have shown that the total amount of sale ... over the years from the project and because of following the percentage completion method there are differences in the figures of sale booked in different years. However, it is evident that the appellant has not made any effort in this regard. In the absence of complete reconciliation, the claim

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

ITA 706/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 May 2025AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

ignored. 2.3 The ld. CIT(A) stated that the argument of the appellant is that unbilled sale is the difference because of following percentage completion method as per accounting standard. If this is true, then the appellant should have shown that the total amount of sale ... over the years from the project and because of following the percentage completion method there are differences in the figures of sale booked in different years. However, it is evident that the appellant has not made any effort in this regard. In the absence of complete reconciliation, the claim

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

ITA 847/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.333, 334 & 335/Chny/2021 & Ita No.847/Chny/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Coimbatore. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs M/S. Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Sf No.454, Ragupathynaickenpalayam, Erode-638 002. Pan :Aaacr-9307-E (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Mr. Shivanand K. Kalakeri, Cit Mr. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement 25.02.2025 16.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 / 19, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 24.02.2021 / 06.07.2022 For Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2016-17 Respectively. The Facts As Well As Issues Are Admittedly Identical In All These Years. For The Purpose Of Adjudication, Ay 2012-13 Has Been Taken To Be The Lead Year. 2. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 127 Days In Filing Three Appeals For Ays 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18. Considering The Reasons Stated In The Affidavits By The Revenue, We Condone The Delay & Treat The Reasons As 'Sufficient Cause' & Admit These Appeals For Adjudication.

Section 250(1)Section 80Section 80I

assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IA of the Income tax Act, 1961 without taking into consideration that the assessee has earned profit on percentage completion method, thus earning income and claiming deduction even before the whole work is completed and also it is to be noted that the assessee ... eligible for deduction under section 801A(4). 9. It is further to be noticed that assessee is recognizing income from the projects on percentage completion method. Thus, even before the whole work of the project/infrastructure facility is completed assessee is recognizing income from the project and claiming deduction under section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S. Rp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 335/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Shivanand K. Kalakeri, CITFor Respondent: Mr. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate

Section 250(1)Section 80Section 80I

eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the Income tax Act, 1961 without taking into consideration that the assessee has earned profit on percentage completion method, thus earning income and claiming deduction even before the whole work is completed and also it is to be noted that the assessee ... eligible for deduction under section 80IA(4). 9. It is further to be noticed that assessee is recognizing income from the projects on percentage completion method. Thus, even before the whole work of the project/infrastructure facility is completed assessee is recognizing income from the project and claiming deduction under section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

ITA 334/CHNY/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.333, 334 & 335/Chny/2021 & Ita No.847/Chny/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S. Rpp Infra Projects Central Circle-2, Coimbatore. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Limited, Sf No.454, Ragupathynaickenpalayam, Erode-638 002. Pan :Aaacr-9307-E (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Shivanand K. Kalakeri, Cit : Mr. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाईकी तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2025 : 16.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 / 19, Chennai [Cit(A)] Dated 24.02.2021 / 06.07.2022 For Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2016-17 Respectively. The Facts As Well As Issues Are Admittedly Identical In All These Years. For The Purpose Of Adjudication, Ay 2012-13 Has Been Taken To Be The Lead Year. 2. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 127 Days In Filing Three Appeals For Ays 2012-13, 2013-14, 2017-18. Considering The Reasons Stated In The Affidavits By The Revenue, We Condone The Delay & Treat The Reasons As 'Sufficient Cause' & Admit These Appeals For Adjudication.

For Respondent: Mr. Shivanand K. Kalakeri, CIT

Section 250(1)Section 80Section 80I

assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IA of the Income tax Act, 1961 without taking into consideration that the assessee has earned profit on percentage completion method, thus earning income and claiming deduction even before the whole work is completed and also it is to be noted that the assessee ... eligible for deduction under section 801A(4). 9. It is further to be noticed that assessee is recognizing income from the projects on percentage completion method. Thus, even before the whole work of the project/infrastructure facility is completed assessee is recognizing income from the project and claiming deduction under section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

In the result, all these four appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 333/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Shivanand K. Kalakeri, CITFor Respondent: Mr. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate

Section 250(1)Section 80Section 80I

eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the Income tax Act, 1961 without taking into consideration that the assessee has earned profit on percentage completion method, thus earning income and claiming deduction even before the whole work is completed and also it is to be noted that the assessee ... eligible for deduction under section 80IA(4). 9. It is further to be noticed that assessee is recognizing income from the projects on percentage completion method. Thus, even before the whole work of the project/infrastructure facility is completed assessee is recognizing income from the project and claiming deduction under section

DCIT 13(3)(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Raj Arcades Homes Private Limited (Aafcr6616R), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3575/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Respondent: Shri J.P. Bairagra, CA

Section 143(3)Section 195J

amenities. Project comprises of 4 wings of 23 floors having a RERA carpet area of 1,79,840 Sq. Ft. Assessee follows percentage completion method of accounting and there is no change in the method of accounting during the previous year. Assessee filed its return of income on 08.10.2018 reporting ... under consideration in the year 2012 with completion expected by March, 2025. During this period of Project construction, assessee declared its profit using percentage completion method and filed its return of income accordingly. He emphasised that ld. CIT(A) has verified the nature of each expenditure made by various parties

Shree Velu Builders Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 560/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.560/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Velu Builders Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Block No. 2, Alaka Palazu, 4/219, Income Tax, Poonamallee High Road, Kattupakkam, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 056. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs6653C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.P. Guru Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Raised 12 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Assessment Order Exparte Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Guru Prasad, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148

noted that the assessee offered gross income at ₹.24,77,86,390/- being 56% of the advances received from the buyers based on percentage completion method of accounting and the expenditure was incorrectly claimed in respect of the income offered @ 56% of work completed. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 462/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 40

seized record that the sale proceeds of the shops were collected substantively in cash and the remaining in cheques/RTGS. The assesseeapparently followed the percentage completion method for the purpose of revenue recognition and for determination of the taxable profits. 3.3 The AO stated in the assessment order that the assesseehad ... maintained proper books of account. While estimating the profits under percentage completion method, the assesseeincorrectly considered only the cheque value/registered value of shops to determine the sale rate i.e. Rs.4,356/- per sq. ft. Whereas, the actual sales, based on the findings of the search, werebetween Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

ITA 461/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 40

seized record that the sale proceeds of the shops were collected substantively in cash and the remaining in cheques/RTGS. The assesseeapparently followed the percentage completion method for the purpose of revenue recognition and for determination of the taxable profits. 3.3 The AO stated in the assessment order that the assesseehad ... maintained proper books of account. While estimating the profits under percentage completion method, the assesseeincorrectly considered only the cheque value/registered value of shops to determine the sale rate i.e. Rs.4,356/- per sq. ft. Whereas, the actual sales, based on the findings of the search, werebetween Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 460/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 40

seized record that the sale proceeds of the shops were collected substantively in cash and the remaining in cheques/RTGS. The assesseeapparently followed the percentage completion method for the purpose of revenue recognition and for determination of the taxable profits. 3.3 The AO stated in the assessment order that the assesseehad ... maintained proper books of account. While estimating the profits under percentage completion method, the assesseeincorrectly considered only the cheque value/registered value of shops to determine the sale rate i.e. Rs.4,356/- per sq. ft. Whereas, the actual sales, based on the findings of the search, werebetween Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 459/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 40

seized record that the sale proceeds of the shops were collected substantively in cash and the remaining in cheques/RTGS. The assesseeapparently followed the percentage completion method for the purpose of revenue recognition and for determination of the taxable profits. 3.3 The AO stated in the assessment order that the assesseehad ... maintained proper books of account. While estimating the profits under percentage completion method, the assesseeincorrectly considered only the cheque value/registered value of shops to determine the sale rate i.e. Rs.4,356/- per sq. ft. Whereas, the actual sales, based on the findings of the search, werebetween Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 458/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 40

seized record that the sale proceeds of the shops were collected substantively in cash and the remaining in cheques/RTGS. The assesseeapparently followed the percentage completion method for the purpose of revenue recognition and for determination of the taxable profits. 3.3 The AO stated in the assessment order that the assesseehad ... maintained proper books of account. While estimating the profits under percentage completion method, the assesseeincorrectly considered only the cheque value/registered value of shops to determine the sale rate i.e. Rs.4,356/- per sq. ft. Whereas, the actual sales, based on the findings of the search, werebetween Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20

ACIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Bellissimo Healthy Constructions and Developers Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands Dismissed

ITA 1483/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth,ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (Sr. AR)

Section 143(3)

ld.AO, the assessee submitted certain details including copies of few invoices of broker. The AO noted that the assessee had been following ‘Percentage Completion Method’ for accounting revenues. According to him, as per this method unless and until the completion was above 25%, the assessee did not work out proportional ... Limited (supra), this Court after framing questions with respect to allowance under brokerage and commission claimed by the assessee in the context of percentage completion method adopted by it held as follows: P a g e | 4 A.Y. 2015-16 Bellissimo Healthy Constructions and Developers Private Limited '8. The assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. S R Builders Chennai LLP, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2891/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2891/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

been executed, revenues to the extent of percentage of work completed (45.73%) which comes to Rs 2,03,17,159, following the percentage completion method has been rightly brought to tax by the Assessing officer and the order of the ld CIT(A) is set aside to this extent ... facts of the case and in law. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.10,76,23,212/- towards percentage completion method as prescribed under ICDS- III 3. The Ld.CIT(A)’s has erred in not considering the fact that the assessee has chosen to alter

ACIT Circle-24(1), Piramal Chamber vs. Raiees Yasin Lashkaria, Andheri West

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5457/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 4450/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 5457/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21)

For Appellant: Shri Dipesh RupareliaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

assessee furnished copies of the sale agreements of all the sales except nine flats. Ld. AO observed that the assessee is following the percentage completion method for booking profits and therefore he made an addition in respect of these nine properties based on the percentage completion method which worked

ACIT, Circle 24(1) Mubai, Mumbai vs. Raiees Yasin Lashkaria, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4450/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 4450/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 5457/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21)

For Appellant: Shri Dipesh RupareliaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

assessee furnished copies of the sale agreements of all the sales except nine flats. Ld. AO observed that the assessee is following the percentage completion method for booking profits and therefore he made an addition in respect of these nine properties based on the percentage completion method which worked

Shree Balaji Associates Pune LLP, Pune vs. PCIT(Central), Pune

ITA 1008/PUN/2024[AY 2019 - 20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 43C

your case on 10/01/2019 and subsequent dated, you had worked out sales to be offered to tax for F.Y. 2018-19 by following Percentage Completion Method(PCM) of accounting and had submitted net profit amounting to Rs.2,10,15,755/- to be recognized in the case of assessee M/s. Balaji ... Annuj Goel stated that total WIP of the concerns was Rs 329,22,50.849/- and the concerns of the group is following Percentage Completion Method (PCM) of accounting. During the search, concerns of the group worked out sales to be offered to tax for FY 2018-19 by following

Shree Balaji Associates Pune LLP, Pune vs. PCIT(Central), Pune

ITA 1007/PUN/2024[AY 2018 - 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 43C

your case on 10/01/2019 and subsequent dated, you had worked out sales to be offered to tax for F.Y. 2018-19 by following Percentage Completion Method(PCM) of accounting and had submitted net profit amounting to Rs.2,10,15,755/- to be recognized in the case of assessee M/s. Balaji ... Annuj Goel stated that total WIP of the concerns was Rs 329,22,50.849/- and the concerns of the group is following Percentage Completion Method (PCM) of accounting. During the search, concerns of the group worked out sales to be offered to tax for FY 2018-19 by following

“percentage completion method”

Leading authorities on percentage completion method

Judgments citing percentage completion method

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1 Udaipur, Udaipur

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT- Central Circle-1 Udiapur, Udaipue

Ashiana Buildprop Private Limited, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S. Rp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Coimbatore vs. M/S Rpp Infra Projects Limited, Erode

DCIT 13(3)(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Raj Arcades Homes Private Limited (Aafcr6616R), Mumbai

Shree Velu Builders Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

Ma Smart Developers Mangalore Pvt Ltd., Mangalore vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

ACIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Bellissimo Healthy Constructions and Developers Private Limited, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. S R Builders Chennai LLP, Chennai

ACIT Circle-24(1), Piramal Chamber vs. Raiees Yasin Lashkaria, Andheri West

ACIT, Circle 24(1) Mubai, Mumbai vs. Raiees Yasin Lashkaria, Mumbai

Shree Balaji Associates Pune LLP, Pune vs. PCIT(Central), Pune

Shree Balaji Associates Pune LLP, Pune vs. PCIT(Central), Pune