Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
ITAT holds that, applying the ICAI Guidance Note on Real Estate Accounting (Revised 2012), land and development rights qualify as direct project costs but must be excluded when determining the 25% construction-and-development-cost threshold to trigger revenue recognition under the Percentage of Completion Method (POCM); once that threshold is met using construction and development costs, total project costs (including land) determine stage of completion and revenue to be recognized. The taxpayer's POCM application was correct: Phase-1 exceeded the 25% threshold whereas Phase-2A did not (19.5205%), and unreconciled revenue was recognized in subsequent years at unchanged tax rates. Absent evidence of deliberate evasion or inconsistent accounting, ITAT found the AO and lower authority's additions unjustified, directed vacatur of those additions and allowed the taxpayer's appeal.
ITAT holds that, applying the ICAI Guidance Note on Real Estate Accounting (Revised 2012), land and development rights qualify as direct project costs but must be excluded when determining the 25% construction-and-development-cost threshold to trigger revenue recognition under the Percentage of Completion Method (POCM); once that threshold is met using construction and development costs, total project costs (including land) determine stage of completion and revenue to be recognized. The taxpayer's POCM application was correct: Phase-1 exceeded the 25% threshold whereas Phase-2A did not (19.5205%), and unreconciled revenue was recognized in subsequent years at unchanged tax rates. Absent evidence of deliberate evasion or inconsistent accounting, ITAT found the AO and lower authority's additions unjustified, directed vacatur of those additions and allowed the taxpayer's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
