Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
