TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 1105
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriod income of Rs. 33,342/- for taxation and the Assessing Officer had no warrant to make an addition of Rs. 18,22,518/- which after rectification of double addition mistake vide order dated 01-03-12 served on 15-10-12 stands at Rs. 9,44,601/-; During appellate proceedings the assessee had agreed to drop the issue pertaining to double taxation only on rectification of mistake by the learned A.O." 2. It was submitted by Learned A.R. of the assessee that if prior period expenses are to be disallowed in the present year then prior period incomes should also be excluded in the present year. He further submitted that in fact, the prior period income at Rs. 9,44,601/- is higher to prior period expenses of Rs. 9,11,259 and there is net prior period income of Rs. 33,342/- , which was included by the assessee in the computation of income and hence, no addition is justified on this account. 3. Learned D.R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. In our considered opinion, the addition made by the Assessing Officer is not justified because prior period income reported by the assessee at Rs. 9,44,601/- is more than prior pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT vs. Sibson Construction & Co. 221 ITR 468, it was submitted by Learned A.R. of the assessee that this judgment is not applicable in the facts of the present case. 7. Learned D.R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that it is noted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order that no details of construction of temporary structure were filed by the assessee and on this basis, he disallowed the claim of the assessee. Now we find that in the paper book, the details are available on page No. 46 of the paper book and along with this, photocopy of relevant bills are also available on pages 48 to 54 of the paper book. As per the details available on page No. 46 of the paper book, out of total expenses of Rs. 4,16,228/-, the amount of Rs. 3,85,150/- is on the basis of six bills and the remaining amount of Rs. 31,078/- is on the basis of various small bills, each of less than Rs. 3,000/-. Hence, we feel it proper to examine these six bills, which constitute the majority of the expenses of Rs. 3,85,150/-. 9. The first item is of Rs. 1,52,100/-, being cost of boundary wall and leveling charges. As per th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds for project by the Govt. organizations in the work order almost invariably add a clause that monthly progress report on work done and expenditure have to be furnished. On the basis of such reports profit/centage can be estimated month-wise what to talk of annuals. Failure of the assessee to account for such profit is therefore clearly deliberate, in order to suppress its income" and is therefore liable to be deleted." 16. It was submitted by Learned A.R. of the assessee that the relevant circular dated 27/02/97 is available on pages 73 & 74 of the paper book as per which, centage is allowable @12.5%. He also submitted that in the earlier years also, the assessee was following same method of accounting and it was accepted by the Revenue. He also submitted that in fact, in assessment year 2005-06, the addition was made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) but when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal allowed relief to the assessee as per the Tribunal order dated 29/01/2010 in I.T.A. No.646/Lkw/06, copy of which is available on pages 93 to 100 of the paper book. He also placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d or it amounts to deferment of income and consequently deferment of tax. Rather the case of the Assessing Officer is that when the assessee is following percentage completion method of accounting, he should have accounted for centage receivable on WIP also. The Assessing Officer has noted that the assessee has shown WIP of Rs. 890.29 crores and no evidence has been produced before him to establish that centage has been charged thereon. The case of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee is following percentage completion method of account but the same was not followed in true sense because the assessee has not accounted for centage in respect of WIP. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the Tribunal decision in the case of Hariom Builders (supra), cannot be made applicable in the present case. So far the Tribunal decision in assessee's own case for assessment year 2005-06 is concerned, in the absence of facts and disputes of that year, we cannot compare the facts of this year with the facts of that year and therefore, it cannot be said that the present issue is covered by this Tribunal order. 19. Regarding the reliance of the Learned A.R. of the assessee on various judicial p....