TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, the assessing officer should have recognized the revenue from this project? - Held that:- The revenue has accepted the Project Completion Method in respect of Gym View Project of the respondent-assessee. Further as recorded by Commissioner in his order dated 27 March 2012, the respondent-assessee has offered to tax the income earned on Link Corner Project by following the Project Completion Method in respect of subsequent assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2008-09. It is a settled position of law that where the revenue has accepted a particular method of accounting over several years, the same is not to be lightly substituted unless the revenue is able to show that the same distorts the profit for a particular year. As held by the Apex Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Petitioner : Mr. A R Malhotra a/w N.A. Kazi, Adv For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjiv M Shah, Adv ORDER P. C. This appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act') challenges the order dated 6 February 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the 'Tribunal'). 2. The Assessment Year involved is A.Y. 2007-08. 3. The revenue has raised following questions of law for our consideration: (1) Whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, by the CIT is not valid and that the assessee has not committed any legal error by uniformly and consistently following 'Proj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d directed him to recompute the income of the respondent-assessee in respect of Link Corner Project by applying the Percentage Completion Method. However the profits disclosed by applying the Project Completion Method in case of Gym View Project was not distrubed. 6. Being aggrieved, the respondent-assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order held that the respondent-assessee has been consistently following the Project Completion Method over the years. Further in respect of the two projects which arise for consideration in the subject assessment year, the respondent was following the Project Completion Method in respect of both the projects. The Commissioner while seeking to revise the order of the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following the Project Completion Method in respect of subsequent assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2008-09. It is a settled position of law that where the revenue has accepted a particular method of accounting over several years, the same is not to be lightly substituted unless the revenue is able to show that the same distorts the profit for a particular year. As held by the Apex Court in UCO Bank Vs. CIT 240 ITR 355, the choice of method of accounting is of the assessee. The respondent-assessee has chosen/adopted the Project Completion Method of accounting and has been consistently following it over the years. It is not open to the revenue to reject a method because according to the Assessing Officer another method is prefereable. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the asst. yr. 1952-53 or in the assessment year corresponding to the accounting year 1952, that is in the asst. yr. 1953-54, should be a matter of no consequence to the Department; and one should have thought that the Department would not fritter away its energies in fighting matters of this kind. But, obviously, judging from the references that come up to us every now and then, the Department appears to delight in raising points of this character which do not affect the taxability of the assessee or the tax that the Department is likely to collect from him whether in one year or the other. 10. Accordingly, the questions raised for our consideration do not give rise to any substantial question of law. 11. Hence, appeal dismiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
