Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, dismissing Revenue's appeal. The tribunal confirmed the consistent accounting method for project revenue recognition, rejecting AO's computation of addition under Percentage Completion Method. The tribunal noted the project ultimately resulted in a loss and the assessee's share was incorrectly calculated. The key principles of accounting consistency and proportional revenue recognition were applied, finding no procedural or computational errors in CIT(A)'s original order. The interest expense addition related to land co-owners was also deleted, with the tribunal agreeing that no interest was chargeable on advances. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was comprehensively dismissed.
ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s order, dismissing Revenue's appeal. The tribunal confirmed the consistent accounting method for project revenue recognition, rejecting AO's computation of addition under Percentage Completion Method. The tribunal noted the project ultimately resulted in a loss and the assessee's share was incorrectly calculated. The key principles of accounting consistency and proportional revenue recognition were applied, finding no procedural or computational errors in CIT(A)'s original order. The interest expense addition related to land co-owners was also deleted, with the tribunal agreeing that no interest was chargeable on advances. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was comprehensively dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.