TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 720
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T(A)"), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act'), for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The assessee has filed a cross-objection being C.O. No. 134/Kol/2018 against the appeal of the revenue in ITA No. 2328/Kol/2018. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm and is in the business of real estate development. The only issue that arises for adjudication in this appeal is whether the ld. CIT(A) was right in holding that the Assessing Officer was wrong in changing the method of accounting of the company from Project Completion Method to Percentage Completion Method, while computing income of the assessee. 3. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tify in the Official Gazette from time to time, the income computation a disclosure standard be followed by any class or assessee in respect of any class income, however, that change is prospective as such. However, as far as Sec. 145 is concerned, it is not open to an AO to modify the results so declared in the accounts or to reject the accounts of assessee unless he comes to a determination that notified accounting standard have not been regularly followed by the assessee. As regards the accounting standard issued by ICAI did not have a statutory recognition under the Income-tax Act although it is binding as per the Companies Act, 1956. The method of accounting followed by the appellant- -assessee in the present case i.e. "Project Complet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment doesn't have any applicability to appellant's case. It has also to be understood that the revenue cannot compel the assessee to choose a particular method and the option is always with the assessee to follow a method and not with the Department to follow the method of its choice and the following judgments very categorically held in such respect. Juggilal Kamalpat Bankers v. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 40 (All.) CIT v. Smt Vimla D. Sonwane (1994) 75 Taxman 335 (Bombay) CIT v. Macmillan & Co. (1958) 33 ITR 132 (SC) MKB Asia Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2008) 167 Taxman 256 (Gauhati) Fort Projects (P) Ltd. v. DC IT (2011) 63 DTR (Kol As far as a "contract" per se is concerned, the proper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee had followed from year to year, it was duty of Assessing. Officer to accept results disclosed by assessee from method of accounting adopted, which itself was a recognized method in class of business in which assessee fell-Held, yes H. M. Constructions v. JCIT (2003) 84 ITD 429 (Bang.) -It could not be stated that assessee's method of accounting was prudent in as much as income was accounted for only on completion of project or near completion where revenue could be measured with certainty after providing for possible liability or Losses- Held, yes CIT v. DLF Universal Ltd (2017) 88 taxmann.com 500 (Del)- Project Completion Method-Where assessee dealing in real estate was uniformly following Project Completion....