Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT addressed a case involving a change in accounting policy from Percentage of Completion Method (POCM) to Project Completion Method (PCM) for revenue recognition. The assessee declared a net loss due to the change and the AO added the financial impact as profit, resulting in a significantly higher profit than industry average. The ITAT directed the AO to verify the impact in financial statements for both current and previous years, ensuring correct profit calculation. It emphasized that a change in accounting method does not imply profit understatement, as it is a legitimate decision guided by accounting standards. The ITAT upheld the assessee's right to choose the accounting method and instructed the AO to reevaluate the issue, allowing the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case. The assessee's grounds were allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT addressed a case involving a change in accounting policy from Percentage of Completion Method (POCM) to Project Completion Method (PCM) for revenue recognition. The assessee declared a net loss due to the change and the AO added the financial impact as profit, resulting in a significantly higher profit than industry average. The ITAT directed the AO to verify the impact in financial statements for both current and previous years, ensuring correct profit calculation. It emphasized that a change in accounting method does not imply profit understatement, as it is a legitimate decision guided by accounting standards. The ITAT upheld the assessee's right to choose the accounting method and instructed the AO to reevaluate the issue, allowing the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case. The assessee's grounds were allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
