https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183321 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of assessment for AY 1998-99, citing sufficient reason to believe income had escaped assessment. The addition of Rs. 19,67,575 by closing the contract on 31.03.1998 was reversed as the method of accounting adopted by the assessee was consistent with Accounting Standard-7. The disallowance of site development expenses and the treatment of the difference between closing and opening work-in-progress for AY 2005-06 were referred back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The issue of double taxation of profits for AY 2005-06 was left for the assessee to address with the Assessing Officer. en-us Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jun 2016 18:58:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183321 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of assessment for AY 1998-99, citing sufficient reason to believe income had escaped assessment. The addition of Rs. 19,67,575 by closing the contract on 31.03.1998 was reversed as the method of accounting adopted by the assessee was consistent with Accounting Standard-7. The disallowance of site development expenses and the treatment of the difference between closing and opening work-in-progress for AY 2005-06 were referred back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The issue of double taxation of profits for AY 2005-06 was left for the assessee to address with the Assessing Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183321