https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336893 The CIT(A) justified deleting the addition of 10% of work in progress made by the AO by following the percentage completion method instead of the project completion method adopted by the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing the principle of consistency in the assessee's method of accounting for income from the construction project. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify that all profits from the project were appropriately taxed in subsequent years, maintaining that the 'project completion method' should be accepted for builders unless there is evidence of tax evasion. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the order was pronounced on 19th December 2016. en-us Mon, 19 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Dec 2016 21:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336893 The CIT(A) justified deleting the addition of 10% of work in progress made by the AO by following the percentage completion method instead of the project completion method adopted by the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing the principle of consistency in the assessee's method of accounting for income from the construction project. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify that all profits from the project were appropriately taxed in subsequent years, maintaining that the 'project completion method' should be accepted for builders unless there is evidence of tax evasion. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the order was pronounced on 19th December 2016. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336893