Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Runwal Multihousing Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Pune)
we find that the assessee was regularly following the Percentage completion method by valuing the closing work-in-progress at estimated realizable price. Certain unforeseen circumstances developed. The assessee switched over from the Percentage completion method to the Project completion method by filing a revised return. It is not the case of the Revenue that the revised return was otherwise, not valid. Similarly, the Revenue has also not made out a case that the assessee did not consistently follow the Project completion method in the following years. The ld. AR vehemently submitted that the assessee continued to follow the Project completion method and offered income under this method in the later years. Once it is seen that the assessee switched over from the Percentage completion method to the Project completion method in a bona fide manner and continued with the changed method in the years to come, in our considered opinion, no fault can be found with the ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO sticking to the Percentage completion method, which was abandoned by the assessee. We therefore, accord our imprimatur to the view canvassed by the ld. CIT(A).
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal by the Revenue has been instituted against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Pune, dated 12-03-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2006-07.
2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the deletion of addition of Rs.17,74,99,165 made by the Assessing Officer by not accepting change in the method of accounting adopted by the assessee.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
