“project completion method”

Tyro India, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2017-18 Tyro India Ito Ward 31(3)(2) Now 5, New Ambica Apartment, Transferred To 41(4)(4) Jawahar Nagar Road, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Goregaon (West), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400062. Bandra (East), Pan: Aacft6482D Mumbai- 400051. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P.D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Vide Its Order No. Itba/Nfac/ S/250/2023-24/1058988518(1) Dated 22/12/2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 1. The Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised:- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessing Officer Erred In Enhancing Scope Of Scrutiny Wrongly Converting The Cass Based

Method of Accounting for Revenue Recognition without stating any reasons and thereby a. Overlooking past years' records. b. Overlooking the fact that Project Completion Method of accounting is consistently followed by the Appellant c. Estimating profit of Rs 29,78,944/- @10% of WIP without any comparable instance ... have shown profit for the A.Y.2017-18 under Tyro Construction account for Rs. 29,78,944/- We maintain accounts for construction activity, on project completion method. Sales are not shown in P&L account of Tyro Construction account as the project is not completed in A.Y.2017-18. The profit reflected in Tyro

Tyro India, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(3)(2) Now Transferred to 41(4)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

arising due to a clerical error as regards application of Method of Accounting for Revenue Recognition a. By overlooking past years' records b. Project Completion Method of accounting consistently followed by the Appellant c. Applying Percentage of Completion Method d. Estimating profit ... India “....We have shown profit for the A.Y.2016-17 under Tyro Construction account for Rs.2,86,137/- We maintain accounts for construction activity, on project completion method. Sales are not shown in P&L account of Tyro Construction account as the project is not completed in A.Y.2016-17. The profit reflected

Platinum Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

project has been recognized only in the year under consideration when assessee got the Occupancy Certificate and therefore, assessee has been following the “project completion method” and accordingly, action of the ld. AO in taxing the on-money in A.Y.2013-14 is justified. 6. Another contention raised by the ld. Counsel

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kumar Properties Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue as well as Cross

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassistant Commissioner Of Vs. Kumar Properties Private Income Tax – 1(2)(1) Limited, 21, Woudboy Room No. 535, 5 Th Floor, Road, Hazarimal Somani Aayakar Bhawan, New Marg, Opp. Mumbai Marine Line, M.K. Road, Gymkhana, Fort – Mumbai- 400020 400001 Maharashtra – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aabck8464E Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No.13/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

return was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 11.07.2017. The assessee was following project completion method during the course of assessment proceedings. However, the AO has not accepted the project completion method on the ground that the Department has determined ... income on the basis of percentage completion method for the A.Y. 2014-15 after rejecting project completion method. On query the assessee explained after referring para 11 of accounting standard 9 of revenue recognition issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountant Associate India as under: “In a transaction involving

Sai Builders and Developers, Vashi vs. PCIT-27, Vashi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalsaibuildersanddevelopers, Vs Pr.Cit-27, B12,Ashiana,Plotno.15, Roomno.401, Sector17,Vashi, 4Thflr,Towerno.6, Navi Mumbai-400703. Vashi Railway Stationcomplex,Vashi, Navimumbai-400703. Pan/Gir No. : Abbfs0092C Appellant .. Respondent

added to the valuation of Closing WIP. This practice of the assessee is not as per revenue recognized by percentage completion method or project completion method. The assessee has adopted its own method which is not in order. For builders/developers, it is required to recognize the revenue either ... percentage completion method or project completion method. 3. Further, on verification of the Audit Reportit is seen that Auditor has reported that in respect of Project Yashaskaram, though the OC is received on 20.05.2016, the firm has been incurring various construction and finishing expenses to make the units ready

DCIT -26(1), Mumbai vs. Shreyas Builders, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2404/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-17(1) बिधम/ Shreyas Builders Room No. 117, 1St Floor, G- A-42, 4Th Floor Roop Vs. Block, Kautliya Bhavan, Darshan, Juhu Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai- Mumbai-400051. 400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aapfs5485E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Dr. Kishor Dhule (Cit,Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit”], Delhi Dated 08.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. In The Several Grounds Raised In The Appeal, The Revenue Has Agitated The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding That The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development & Therefore The Plot Of Land Held By It Was In Nature Of ‘Stock-In-Trade’ As Opposed To The Ao’S Action Of Holding The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’. According To Revenue Therefore, Since The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’, The Levy Of Capital Gains Tax Stood Triggered Upon Execution Of Joint Development Agreement (Herein

sold by the assessee, the corresponding revenues had been offered to tax by way of ‘Business Income’ in the later years, following project completion method. According to him therefore, the conduct of the assessee clearly showed that the land parcels were held by way of ‘stock-in-trade’. He specifically ... treated the land as their inventory, has recorded the receipt from sale of constructed spaces as its revenues from business, following the recognized project completion method. It was brought to our notice that, the Developer had completed four (4) out of the eleven (11) buildings proposed to be constructed

Kalindi Estate Developers, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (Jm)

assessee had constructed one tower named Wing-B out of the two “free sale towers”. According to the assessee it is following project completion method and profit shall be ascertained and offered for taxation only at the end of the completion of the project. However, during the course of survey ... wing-A and also handed over the possession. However, the assessee did not offer any income on the reasoning that it is following project completion method. When questioned about the same, the assessee admitted that it had sold 32 flats in wing-A and also agreed to offer

M/S. Rdc Ventures, Mumbai vs. PCIT-27, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Rdc Ventures Vs. Principal Commissioner Office No.-110 Of Income Tax-27 Ridhhisidhhi Premises Room No. 401, 4 Th Floor, Society, Near Sahakar Tower No. 6, Vashi Talkies Tilak Nagar, Railway Station, Chembur (West) Mumbai- Commercial Complex, 400089 Vashi, Navi Mumbai -400703 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aakfr0914Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dhran Gandhi Respondent By : Sanyogita Nagpal Date Of Hearing 29.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2024

details submitted during the course of assessment proceedings, it is not specifically mentioned that whether assessee is following percentage completion method or project completion method for recognizing the revenue. However, as per the details submitted, if is seen that assessee is following project completion method for recognizing the revenue ... year. The Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Wallstreet Construction Ltd. Vs. JCIT has decided that where the assessee is following project completion method of accounting, the interest identifiable with that project should be allowed only in the year when the project is completed and the income from

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

concluded as aforesaid, we find some merit in the alternative contention of the Appellant. It was submitted that since the Appellant is following project completion method and the projects have been completed, the entire Revenue from the project would have been offered to tax and therefore, in absence