Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Jaipur (Raj.) v. Shakuntalam Colonizers Pvt. Ltd
[Citation -2017-LL-0808-17]

Citation 2017-LL-0808-17
Appellant Name Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Jaipur (Raj.)
Respondent Name Shakuntalam Colonizers Pvt. Ltd.
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 08/08/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags project completion method • application of mind

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 229 / 2017 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur (Raj.) Appellant Versus M/s. Shakuntalam Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., 103-104, Geetanjali Tower, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aditya Vijay for Mr. Anuroop Singhi For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 08/08/2017 By way of this appeal, appellant has assailed judgment and order of Tribunal whereby Tribunal has dismissed appeal of department. Counsel for appellant has framed following question of law:- i) Whether Tribunal has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 3,50,18,617/- made by Assessing Officer after invoking provisions of Section 145(3) as assessee has failed to maintained its books on Percentage Completion Method prescribed by Institute to Chartered Accounts of India and not following Accounting Standard-9 and 7? ii) Whether Tribunal was justified in rejecting revenue s appeal without any application of mind and thereby holding that Assessing (2 of 2) [ITA-229/2017] Officer has erred in rejecting books of accounts of assessee under Section 145(3) of Act and reversing findings, ignoring undisputed facts that assessee has failed to maintain quantitative and qualitative stock registers and vouch expenses incurred by it and thereby deleting addition of Rs. 3,50,18,617/- iii) Whether Tribunal was justified in holding that Percentage Completion Method applied by Assessing Officer was unjustified and Project Completion Method adopted by assessee was proper, ignoring that said method of assessee for computation of income was in contravention of Accounting Standards 7 (Construction Contracts) and 9 (Revenue Recognitiion) issued by ICAI? iv) Whether on facts and circumstances of case, finding of Tribunal is perverse, contrary to record and untenable in eye of law? However, issue is already decided by this Court in case of CIT Central Jaipur vs. M/s Unique Builders and Developers Jpr in DBITA No. 23/2013 & other connected matters decided on 19 th May, 2017. issues are answered in favour of assessee against department. appeal stands dismissed. (INDERJEET SINGH),J. (K.S. JHAVERI),J. A.Sharma/50 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Jaipur (Raj.) v. Shakuntalam Colonizers Pvt. Ltd
Report Error