2021 (3) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai (in short 'the CIT(A)') dated 22/03/2019 for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. Shri Satish Mody, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a builder and developer. The assessee is following Project Completion Method for recognition of profit. The assessee for the impugned assessment year filed return of income on 30/09/2013 declarin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ition of the aforesaid penalty amount. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 17/03/2016 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, the CIT(A) without appreciating the facts rejected assessee's contention and upheld the assessment order, hence, the present appeal by the assessee. 3. Per contra, Shri Ajay Pratap Singh representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessment year 2017-18 has reduced the amount of penalty/regulation charges amounting to Rs. 19.51 lacs paid to BMC. The fact that the assessee is following Project Completion Method to recognise profits has not been disputed by the Revenue. The only issue is, whether the assessee in return of income for the year in which income from project has been declared has reduced the amount of Rs. 19.51 la .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X