TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and (iii) CIT VS. S.N.BUILDERS DEVELOPERS [ 2021 (1) TMI 789 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] Tribunal held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10) in respect of 12th and 13th floor flats, when the flats were combined and were measuring more than 1500 square feet - Second substantial question of law has been answered in favour of the assessee in (i) UCO BANK VS. CIT [ 1999 (5) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT ] (ii) STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS VS. KURIAN ABRAHAM PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER [ 2008 (2) TMI 289 - SUPREME COURT ] (iii) NAVNITLAL ZAVERI VS. K.K.SEN [ 1964 (10) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT ] and (iv) AZADI BACHAO ANDOLAN [ 2003 (10) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT ] Whether assessee was entitled to deduction of the flats ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er method of accounting finally lead to the same results in terms of profits and therefore, revenue neutral. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. NO.198 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V. ARAVIND ADV.,) RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A SHANKAR SENIOR FOR SRI. V. CHANDRASEKHAR AND M. LAVA ADVS.,) JUDGMENT ALOK ARADHE J., This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the revenue. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2006-07. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 20.07.2015 on the follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a builder and developer? 2. When the matter was taken up today, learned senior counsel for the assessee submitted that first substantial question of law has already been answered in favour of the assessee by judgment of this court in (i) CIT VS. BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LTD', (2020) 120 TAXMANN.COM 346 (KAR.), (ii) CIT VS. SJR BUILDERS IT APPEAL NO.32 OF 2012 DATED 19.03.2012 (KAR.), and (iii) CIT VS. S.N.BUILDERS DEVELOPERSIN ITA NO.393 OF 2014 DATED 07.01.2021 (KAR.), whereas, it is also submitted that second substantial question of law has been answered in favour of the assessee in (i) UCO BANK VS. CIT 237 ITR 889 (SC) (ii) STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS VS. KURIAN ABRAHAM PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER, 303 ITR 284 (SC), (iii) NAVNI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he income chargeable under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business' shall be computed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. The general provision is subject to accounting standards that the Central Government may notify. The assessee is a builder and developer and not a construction contractor simplicitor. Accounting Standard- 7, titled construction contracts is applicable only in case of contractors and does not apply to the case of developers and builders which is evident from opinion rendered by expert advisory committee of ICAI. It is pertinent to note that the assessee had offered the income for Assessment Year 2007-08 and no income from the project was offered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
