Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT upheld the assessee's method of revenue recognition under AS-9, wherein income is recognized upon execution of sale deeds and possession transfer, rejecting the AO's application of PCM under AS-7 and Section 43CB. The tribunal found the assessee consistently capitalized costs as work-in-progress and credited advances as liabilities rather than revenue, reflecting proper accounting treatment. The AO's adverse inference applying PCM was deemed erroneous as the assessee was a developer, not a contractor. Following precedents, the ITAT deleted the additions made by the lower authorities, allowing the assessee's grounds and confirming the acceptance of the revenue recognition method for the assessment year in question.
The ITAT upheld the assessee's method of revenue recognition under AS-9, wherein income is recognized upon execution of sale deeds and possession transfer, rejecting the AO's application of PCM under AS-7 and Section 43CB. The tribunal found the assessee consistently capitalized costs as work-in-progress and credited advances as liabilities rather than revenue, reflecting proper accounting treatment. The AO's adverse inference applying PCM was deemed erroneous as the assessee was a developer, not a contractor. Following precedents, the ITAT deleted the additions made by the lower authorities, allowing the assessee's grounds and confirming the acceptance of the revenue recognition method for the assessment year in question.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.