https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264435 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the AO's addition, ruling that income should be recognized when work is completed and bills are submitted, distinguishing between mobilization advances and contract receipts. The ITAT found no revenue prejudice as income had been taxed in a different year, emphasizing the importance of assessing income based on agreement terms and factual context. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Sep 2015 07:31:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264435 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the AO's addition, ruling that income should be recognized when work is completed and bills are submitted, distinguishing between mobilization advances and contract receipts. The ITAT found no revenue prejudice as income had been taxed in a different year, emphasizing the importance of assessing income based on agreement terms and factual context. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264435