Tribunal favors assessee, cancels Commissioner's order on income computation from construction contracts. The Tribunal allowed both appeals in favor of the assessee, canceling the Commissioner's order challenging the computation of income from civil ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tribunal favors assessee, cancels Commissioner's order on income computation from construction contracts.
The Tribunal allowed both appeals in favor of the assessee, canceling the Commissioner's order challenging the computation of income from civil construction contracts. The Tribunal upheld the assessments by the Assessing Officer, emphasizing the validity of the assessee's project completion method for accounting profits or losses. It concluded that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act was not lawful in this case, citing consistent practice and legal precedents supporting the assessee's chosen accounting method.
Issues involved: Jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act regarding computation of income from construction work.
Summary: The appeals were against the Commissioner's order u/s 263 of the Act, challenging the computation of income from civil construction contracts. The assessee followed the project completion method for accounting, recognizing profit or loss upon project completion. The Commissioner directed the Assessing Officer to consider profits on work-in-progress, citing legal precedents. The assessee argued that their method was valid, supported by the Bombay High Court decision and consistent practice since 1982-83. The Senior Departmental Representative acknowledged both methods were recognized but emphasized the need for a reasonable view favoring the revenue.
After reviewing the arguments, the Tribunal found no error in the assessment orders. It noted that the chosen method of accounting was regularly employed by the assessee, as evidenced by consistent practice. The Tribunal emphasized that the revenue must respect the assessee's chosen method unless it does not properly deduce profits. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 was not lawful in this case. Therefore, the Tribunal canceled the order u/s 263 and upheld the assessments by the Assessing Officer, rendering all subsequent proceedings irrelevant.
In conclusion, both appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
