Welfare Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Rahul Constructions v. Dy. CIT 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1310 (Pune-Trib)
REFERRED C.B. Gautam v. Union of India & Ors. 1993 TaxPub(DT) 0887 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax PublishersITA No. 4934/Mum/2018 2019 TaxPub(DT) 8065 (Mum-Trib) : (2020) 180 ITD 0591 : (2020) 205 TTJ 0668 IN THE ITAT , MUMBAI G BENCH S.RIFAUR REHMAN, A.M. & RAVISH SOOD, J.M. Welfare Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT ITA No. 4934/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 29 November, 2019 Appellant by: R.C. Jain, C.A. Respondent by: V. Vinod Kumar, D.R ORDER *Per Ravish Sood, J.M.* The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)-21, Mumbai, dated 29-6-2018, which in turn arises from the order passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short Act‟), dated 12-12-2017. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: 1. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 448350 under section 43CA of the Act to the consideration received in respect of agreement to sale executed during the year and brought to tax as per revenue recognised on percentage completion method. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersITA No. 4934/Mum/2018
2019 TaxPub(DT) 8065 (Mum-Trib) : (2020) 180 ITD 0591 : (2020) 205 TTJ 0668

IN THE ITAT , MUMBAI G BENCH

S.RIFAUR REHMAN, A.M. & RAVISH SOOD, J.M.

Welfare Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT

ITA No. 4934/Mum/2018

A.Y. 2015-16

29 November, 2019

Appellant by: R.C. Jain, C.A.

Respondent by: V. Vinod Kumar, D.R

ORDER

Per Ravish Sood, J.M.

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)-21, Mumbai, dated 29-6-2018, which in turn arises from the order passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short Act‟), dated 12-12-2017. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

1. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 448350 under section 43CA of the Act to the consideration received in respect of agreement to sale executed during the year and brought to tax as per revenue recognised on percentage completion method.