The ACIT, Circle-9,, Ahmedabad v. M/s Shree Parshwanath Corporation,, Ahmedabad

ITA 2213/AHD/2005 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 221320514 RSA 2005
Assessee PAN APRIL1996A
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 2213/AHD/2005
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant The ACIT, Circle-9,, Ahmedabad
Respondent M/s Shree Parshwanath Corporation,, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 21-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 21-05-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 22-03-2010
Next Hearing Date 22-03-2010
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 17-10-2005
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH 'B' (BEFORE S/SHRI D T GARASIA JM AND A N PAHUJA AM) ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:-2001-02) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX CIRCLE-9 AHMEDABAD V/S M/S SHREE PARSHWANATH CORPORATION 50 HARISIDHA CHAMBER ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD [PAN:AADFS3093C] [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] REVENUE BY :- MS. SMRITI SAMANT DR ASSESSEE BY:- SHRI M G PATEL AR O R D E R A N PAHUJA: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST AN ORDER DATED 08-07-2005 OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-XV AHMEDABAD R AISES THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.30 66 750/- WHICH WAS MADE ON THE BASIS OF PERCE NTAGE COMPLETION METHOD. 2 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN D ELETING DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS.71 50 643/- WHEN IT WAS NOT THE BUSI NESS OF ASSESSEE TO ARRANGE FOR FUNDS BY RAISING LOANS FROM BANK. 3 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE R ESTORED TO THE ABOVE EXTENT. 2. ADVERTING FIRST TO GROUND NO.1 IN THE APPEAL FA CTS IN BRIEF AS PER RELEVANT ORDERS ARE THAT RETURN DECLARING LOSS OF RS.9 74 661/- FILED ON 29.10.2001 BY THE ASSESSEE CARRYING ON TH E BUSINESS OF CIVIL CONSTRUCTION WAS TAKEN UP FOR SCRUTINY WITH THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961[HEREINAFTER R EFERRED TO AS THE ACT] ON 29.10.2002. DURING THE PERIOD UNDER CONSI DERATION THE ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 2 ASSESSEE UNDERTOOK CIVIL CONSTRUCTION WORK ON BEHA LF OF KALPATARU PARK COOP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. ZUNDAL (PROPOSED) K ALPAVRUKSHA COOP. HSG SOC LTD. KOBA (PROPOSED) AND KSHIPDEV COO P HSG. SOC. LTD. VADAJ. THE ASSESSING OFFICER [AO IN SHORT] FOU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE OPTED 'COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD' OF ACCO UNTING I.E ONE OF THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING PRESCRIBED UNDER AS-7 BY THE I CAI FOR MAINTENANCE OF THEIR ACCOUNTS. ACCORDING TO THE AO SINCE THE CHOICE OF ACCOUNTING POLICY IS LEFT TO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR WITHOUT ANY RIDER BY ICAI IT WAS OBLIGATORY ON THE PART OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO SELECT SUCH ACCOUNTING POLICY WHICH IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT. THE AO WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE F RAMED ADOPTING 'PERCENTAGE OF COMPLETION METHOD AS AGAINST COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD' ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: A) THE 'COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD' WAS NOT REPRESE NTING A TRUE AND FAIR VIEW OF THE STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE BUSINESS AS PRESCRIB ED VIDE NOTIFICATION NO. S.O. 69(E) DATED 25-01-1996 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDI A. B) THERE WAS A CHANGE IN LAW TO BE PRECISE SECTION 80IB(10) HENCE AS PROVIDED BY ABOVE REFERRED NOTIFICATION AND CLARIFI ED BY 'ICAI' THE CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING POLICY WAS NECESSARY. C) IT WAS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE DECREES OF SUPREME COURT 2.1 IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID FACTS IN RESPON SE TO A NOTICE DATED 9.2.2004 ISSUED BY THE AO THE ASSESSEE REPLIED VIDE THEI R LETTER DATED 11.2.2004 THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM IN TERMS OF PAR TNERSHIP DEED EXECUTED ON 25TH APRIL 1996 AND ITS FIRST ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS 1 997-98. SINCE THEN THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING REGULARLY EMPLOYED WAS 'COMPLE TED CONTRACT METHOD'. 'HABITAT' WAS THEIR FIRST CONSTRUCTION PROJECT STAR TED IN A.Y. 1997-98 AND COMPLETED IN A.Y. 2000-01. ASSESSMENT FOR THE SAID AY 1997-9 8 U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS FINALIZED ON 26.3.2003 DETERMINING LOSS AT RS.3 93 51 660/-.DURING THE COURSE OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE 'HABITAT ' THE ASSESSEE STARTED CIVIL CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF ABOVE REFERRED THREE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETIES BY ENTERING INTO DEVELOPMENT ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 3 AGREEMENTS WITH THEM. AS PER THE TERMS OF THE AG REEMENT THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ENTITLED TO 'REMUNERATION' BEING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE SCHEME AND TOTAL COST INCUR RED IN CONNECTION WITH THE SCHEME AND THIS REMUNERATION WOULD ACCRUE ON COMPLE TION OF RESPECTIVE SCHEME. RELYING UPON THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF T.S. CHAN DRASHEKHAR V. ACIT ITAT BANGLORE 66 TTJ 360 MADHAVAN HOUSE BUILDING COOP SOC. V. ACIT ITAT BANGLORE 76 TTJ 948 ACIT V. MAGNUM INTERNATIONAL TRADING CO. ITAT DELHI 'D' 3RD MEMBER 79 TTJ 552) SHAPOORJI PALLONGS & CO. (R AJKOT) P. LTD. V. ITO ITAT BOMBAY 49 ITD 479) M. CONSTRUCTIONS V. JCIT ITAT BANGLORE 84 ITD 429 HAPPY HOME DEVELOPERS V. ACIT ITAT MUMBAI 115 TAXM AN 300 (MAG.) MALAD SHOPPING CENTRE P. LTD. V. ITO 17 TTJ 125 (MUM.) BHARAT BIJLI LTD. V. DCIT 71 ITD 412 (MUM.) SANDVIK ASIA LTD. V. DCIT 69 ITD 59 ( PUNE) AND BALAPUR VIBHAG JUNGLE KAMDAR MANDLI LTD. V. CIT 135 ITR 91 (GUJ) THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS REGULARLY FOLLOWING 'COMPLET ED CONTRACT' METHOD THEIR ACCOUNTING POLICY MAY NOT BE DISTURBED. THE ONGOIN G THREE PROJECTS HAD BEEN COMPLETED IN 2003-04 AND THE INCOME EARNED ON THE S AID SCHEME HAS BEEN DULY OFFERED IN A.Y. 2003-04. THE ASSESSEE PLEADED. 2.2 HOWEVER THE AO REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT MAINTENANCE OF ACCOUNTS PROJECTS WISE AND COM PLETION OF ONE PROJECT OR COMMENCEMENT OF ANOTHER PROJECT EITHER DURING THE P ENDENCY OF EARLIER PROJECT OR ON COMPLETION OF OLD PROJECT HAS NO RELEVANCE. MOR EOVER UNDER AS-7 IT WAS PRESCRIBED THAT A FORESEEABLE LOSS ON THE ENTIRE CO NTRACT SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AMOUNT OF WORK DONE AND THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT T HE ASSESSEE ENTERED INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THREE COOPERATIVE HOUSIN G SOCIETIES IN A.Y. 1999-00 AND COMPLETED WORK IN A.Y. 2003-04 DISCLOSING NET P ROFIT OF RS.4 31 38 554/- . HOWEVER IN THE RETURN THE INCOME WAS COMPUTED AS UNDER: PROFIT & GAIN OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION RS. 4 32 32 215 LESS SET OFF OF B/F BUSINESS LOSS RS. 2 24.58.977 ----------------------- RS. 2 07 73 238 ADD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RS. 3 75 0 ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 4 ----------------------- RS. 2 07 76 988 LESS B/F DEPRECIATION RS. 8.63.860 ----------------------- GROSS TOTAL INCOME RS. 1 99 13 128 LESS DEDUCTION U/S 80-IB RS. 2 00 64 507 IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID CLAIM U/S 80IB(10) OF THE ACT THE AO WAS OF THE OPINION THAT IF THE ACCOUNTING POLICY WAS NOT CHANGED IT WILL CREATE ABSURD RESULTS AS THE ASSESSEE WOULD AVAIL DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(10) FOR WH ICH IT WAS NOT ENTITLED. AS REGARDS PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING ACCRUAL OF R EMUNERATION OR INCOME ON THE COMPLETION OF CONTRACT THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE AG REEMENT CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT CONSTRUCTION WILL BE CARRIED OUT ONLY AFTER GE TTING MONEY FROM MEMBERS. THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR STRAIGHT WAY REFUND OF MO NEY TO ANYBODY BE IT COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY OR MEMBER. HENCE THE DI FFERENCE BETWEEN COLLECTION FROM MEMBERS AND WORK IN PROGRESS IS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. MERE FORMALITY OF PASSING ENTRIES DOES NOT CHANGE THE NA TURE OF REVENUE THE AO CONCLUDED. WHILE REFERRING TO NOTIFICATION NO. S.O. 69(E) DATED 25.1.1996 AND THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD 'INCOME' AS ALSO THE DECISIO NS IN THE CASE OF DOOARS TEA CO. LTD. V. COMM. OF AGRL. IT. [1962] 44 ITR 6 TUTI CORIN ALKALI CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS LTD. V. CIT 1997] 227 ITR 172(SC) MODI IND. LTD. V. CIT [1995] 216ITR759(SC) AND TIRATH RAM AHUJA PVT. LTD. VS. CI T 103 ITR 15 (1975) DELHI B.S.C. FOOTWEAR(1972) 83 ITR 269(HL) AND CIT VS. BR ITISH PAINTS INDIA LIMITED 188 ITR 44(SC) THE AO BROUGHT TO TAX THE INCOME O F RS.30 66 750/- 3 ON APPEAL THE ASSESSEE WHILE REITERATING THEIR C ONTENTIONS BEFORE THE AO SUBMITTED SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING REGULARLY AND CONSISTENTLY COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD OF RECOGNISING THE INCOME DULY ACC EPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN PAST THE SAME HAS TO BE FOLLOWED IN SUBSEQUENT YEA RS. WHILE RELYING UPON THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF MALAD SHOPING CENTRE P. L TD. V. ITO ITAT BOMBAY 17 TTJ 125 BHARAT BIJLEE LTD. V. DCIT ITAT MUMBAI 71 ITD 412 SANDVIK ASIA LTD. V. DCIT ITAT - PUNE BENCH 69 ITD 59 AND BALAR PUR VIBHAG JUNGLE KAMADAR MANDLI LTD. V. CIT 135 ITR 81 (GUJ) THE ASSESSEE A RGUED THAT THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ACCEPTED .IN THE LIGHT OF THESE SUBMISSIONS THE LD. CIT(A) CONCLUDED AS UNDER: ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 5 2.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AUTHOR ISED REPRESENTATIVE CAREFULLY AND HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DETAILS FILED BY THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. IT IS THE CLAIM OF T HE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT AT THE END OF THE COMPLETION OF EACH PROJECT THE NET PROFIT OF EACH PROJECT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED WHEREAS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ASSESSED THE NET PROFIT ON THE BASIS OF PERCENT AGE OF COMPLETION OF EACH PROJECT. IT IS ALSO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING O FFICER HAS NOT DISTURBED THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOR COMPUTING THE INCOME O F THE APPELLANT SHOWN BY THE APPELLANT IN THE OTHER YEARS. THE APPELLANT HAS GIVEN PROJECT WISE SUMMARY AS PER PAGE 83 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT ON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECTS THE APPELLANT HAS OFFERED THE INCOME. THE APPELLANT HAS FOLLOWED 'COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD.' THE FIRST CONSTRUCTION PROJECT I.E. 'HABIT AT' AT GULBAI TEKRA WAS COMPLETED IN A.Y. 2000-01 AND IN THAT YEAR FINAL LO SS HAS BEEN OFFERED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THAT YEAR AND DURING THE YEAR IN THE PROJECTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL FLATS FOR THE THREE SOCIETIES I.E. PARK CO. OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. ZUNDAL KAL PAVRUKSHA CO. OPERATIVE. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. KOBA AND KSHIPDEV CO. OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VADAJ WERE NOT COMPLETED AND T HEREFORE THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN THE CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES INCUR RED ON THE SAID PROJECTS ON THE ASSET SIDE AND THE AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM THE MEMBERS ON LIABILITY SIDE. THE APPELLANT HAS CITED VARIOUS DEC ISIONS WHEREIN THE COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED. THE TENAMENTS OF ZUNDAL PROJECT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN F.Y.2001-02 A ND THE OTHER PROJECTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED DURING F.Y. 2002-03 AND INCOME EARNED ON THE SAID SCHEMES HAVE BEEN DULY OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN A.Y. 2002-03 AND 2003-04. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AS THE METHOD OF ACCOUNT ING OF PROFIT IN OTHER YEARS ON THE BASIS OF COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD HAS NOT BEEN DISTURBED AND THE COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD IS AN ACCEPTED ME THOD OF ACCOUNTING IN MY OPINION IT IS NOT JUSTIFIED TO CHANGE THE ME THOD OF ACCOUNTING THEREBY TO MAKE ADDITION OF RS.30 66 750/- DURING T HE YEAR IN APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFF ICER IS DELETED. 4 THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A).THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF TH E AO WHILE THE LD. AR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A). 5 WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. UNDISPUTEDLY THE ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING THE COMPLE TED CONTRACT METHOD OF ACCOUNTING RIGHT SINCE INCEPTION IN TERMS OF PARTNE RSHIP DEED EXECUTED ON 25TH APRIL 1996 AND THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THE SAID METHOD OF ACCOUNTING SINCE THEN AS ALSO IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. SEC. 145 OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES THAT BUSINESS INCOME SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WIT H SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 6 REGULARLY EMPLOYED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE CHOICE OF M ETHOD OF ACCOUNTING LIES WITH THE ASSESSEE AND UNLESS CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED IN SEC. 145(3) ARE FULFILLED PROFITS HAVE TO BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TH E METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE [CIT V. MCMILLAN & CO. (1 958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) CIT V. A. KRISHNASWAMI MUDALIAR AND OTHERS (1964) 53 ITR 122 (SC)]. THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CHANGE THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWE D PROVIDED SUCH CHANGE IS BONA FIDE AND IS REGULARLY FOLLOWED THEREAFTER. SEC. 145 HAD BEEN AMENDED BY FINANCE ACT 1995 W.E.F. 1-4-1997 AND THE AMENDED S EC. PROVIDES THAT INCOME SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH EITHER CASH OR MERCANTILE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING REGULARLY FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE. SUB- SEC.(2) EMPOWERS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO NOTIFY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS. NO STANDARD HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE REVENUE WHICH SPECIFIC ALLY DEALS WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING TO BE FOLLOWED BY BUILDERS OR DEVELOPERS . SUBSEC.(3) THEREOF PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT SATISFIED A BOUT THE CORRECTNESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ACCOUNTS OR WHERE THE METHOD OF ACC OUNTING HAS NOT BEEN REGULARLY FOLLOWED THE AO MAY MAKE THE ASSESSMENT IN THE MANNER PROVIDED IN S. 144. THOUGH IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC. 145 BUSINESS INCOME HAS TO BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTIN G REGULARLY FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE IT DOES NOT DETERMINE CHARGEABILITY OF IN COME. [ CIT V. A. KRISHNASWAMI MUDALIAR AND OTHERS (1964) 53 ITR 122 (SC) CIT V. MOTOR CREDIT CO. P. LTD. (1981) 127 ITR 572 (MAD.) KEWAL CHAND BAGRI V. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 207 (CAL.)]. IF INCOME HAS NOT ACCRUED AT ALL S. 145 C ANNOT DETERMINE CHARGEABILITY OF SUCH INCOME. SEC. 5 PROVIDES FOR SCOPE OF INCOME CH ARGEABLE TO TAX AND TO THE EXTENT RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE IT READS : 'ACCRUES OR ARISES OR IS DEEMED TO ACCRUE OR ARISE TO HIM . . . .'. WHAT IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IS INCOME WHICH HAS ACCRUED OR ARISEN TO A PERSON. THE CONCEPT OF ACCRUAL WAS CONS IDERED IN E. D. SASSOON & CO. V. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC) AND IT WAS HELD : 'WHAT IS S OUGHT TO BE TAXED MUST BE INCOME AND IT CANNOT BE TAXED UNLESS IT HAS ARRIVED AT A S TAGE WHEN IT CAN BE CALLED INCOME'. PROFITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF TAX HAVE TO BE DETERMINE D AS PER COMMERCIAL PRINCIPLES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC PROV ISIONS OF THE ACT. THOUGH ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND PRACTICES ARE RELEV ANT THESE CANNOT OVERRIDE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. THE SUPREME COURT I N CHALLAPALI SUGARS LTD. V. ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 7 CIT 98 ITR 167 (SC) HAD LAID DOWN THAT PRONOUNCEMENTS OF ACCOUNTING BODIES ARE RELEVANT IN DETERMINING COMMERCIAL PROFITS. IN TUTICORIN ALKALI CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS LTD. V. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC) IT WAS HELD THAT : 'THE A RGUMENT BASED ON ACCOUNTANCY PRACTICE HAS LITTLE MERIT IF S UCH PRACTICE CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED BY ANY PROVISION OF THE STATUTE OR IS CONTRARY TO I T.' THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION IN CASE OF CIT V. BOKARO STEEL LTD. (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC) REITERATED THE SAME PRINCIPLE. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE WAS F OLLOWING COMPLETED CONTRACT METHOD OF ACCOUNTING RIGHT SINCE AY 1997-98 AS ALSO IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. SIMPLY BECAUSE THE ASSESEE WAS EN TITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(10) IN THE AY 2003-04 DOES NOT IMPLY THAT ME THOD OF ACCOUNTING HITHERTO ACCEPTED BY THE AO WAS NOT BONAFIDE. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ESPECIALLY WHEN THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING IS R EGULARLY FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE HAVE NOT PLACED ANY MATERI AL BEFORE US SUGGESTING THAT THE SAID METHOD WAS IN ANY MANNER CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE INCOME HAS TO BE COMPUT ED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING REGULARLY FOLLOWED. SIMILAR VI EW WAS TAKEN IN THE CASE OF MKB(ASIA) P LTD. VS.CIT 294 ITR(GAUHATI) AND IN A N UMBER OF DECISIONS OF THE ITAT RELIED UPON ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE.METHOD O F ACCOUNTING IS RELEVANT ONLY FOR COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND IT CANNOT DETERMINE A CCRUAL OF INCOME. THE LD. DR APPEARING BEFORE US HAS NOT REFERRED US TO ANY MATE RIAL SUGGESTING THAT INCOME HAS ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSI DERATION. IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WIT H THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE GROUND NO.1 IN THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6 NEXT GROUND NO.2 RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTE REST. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BORROWED MONEY AND PAID INTEREST OF RS.71 50 643/- EVEN WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAVING SURPLUS FUNDS OF RS.1 53 7 8 828/-. THE ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS WAS TO ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WI TH NTC OR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETIES AND TO COLLECT FUNDS FROM THE MEM BERS AND TO START CONSTRUCTION AND HAND OVER POSSESSION OF RESIDENTIA L /COMMERCIAL UNITS AFTER COLLECTING ENTIRE AMOUNT IN ADVANCE. AS THE ASSESSE E HAD SURPLUS FUNDS OF RS.1 23 12 078/- AT ITS DISPOSAL AT THE BEGINNING O F THE YEAR AND IT HAD COLLECTED ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 8 ADDITIONAL SURPLUS FUND OF RS.30 66 750/- DURING TH E YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THE INTEREST EXPENSES WERE NOT IN CURRED FOR THE ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS. THE AO FURTHER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN ADVANCES FROM CHAROTAR NAGARIK CO-OP. BANK LTD. FOR THE LANDS SIT UATED AT VILLAGE ZUNDAL AND CHANDKHEDA . THEREFORE THE AO WAS OF THE OPINION T HAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD ARRANGED FUNDS BY RAISING LOANS AND PAID INTEREST T HEREON FOR DEVELOPING THE AFORESAID LANDS IT CANNOT BE SAID FOR THE CONSTRUC TION ACTIVITY ON CONTRACT BASIS AND IT WOULD BE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCHEME ON I TS OWN. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE AO DISALLOWED INTEREST OF RS.71 50 643/-. 7 ON APPEAL THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THEIR CONTENT IONS BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDINGLY THE LD. CIT(A) DEALT WITH THE ISSUE I N THE FOLLOWING TERMS: 3.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AUTHOR IZED REPRESENTATIVE CAREFULLY . IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE APPELLANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BORROWED FUNDS ON INT EREST AND SHOULD NOT HAVE PAID INTEREST BUT AS PER THE AGREEMENT THE AP PELLANT AS A DEVELOPER HAD TO TAKE FUNDS FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT S AND FOR THESE PROJECTS LOANS HAVE BEEN TAKEN FROM CHAROTAR NAGRIK CO.OP. B ANK LTD. AND INTEREST HAS BEEN CAPITALIZED AMONG VARIOUS PROJECTS. IN VIE W OF THE ABOVE FACTS AS THE APPELLANT HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF INTERE ST AND THE BORROWALS HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND AS P ER THE CLAUSES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS HELD TO BE NOT JUSTIFIED. ACCO RDINGLY THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DELETED. 8. THE REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAIN ST THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. DR SUPPORTED TH E ORDER OF THE AO WHILE THE LD. AR EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T CLAIMED DEDUCTION FOR INTEREST DISALLOWED BY THE AO. SINCE INTEREST WAS CAPITALIZED AND CLAIMED IN THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE AYS 2002-03 AND 2003-04 NO DISALLOWANCE COULD BE MADE IN THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THRO UGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. UNDISPUTEDLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH METHOD O F ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED REGULARLY BY THE ASSESSEE INTEREST ON FU NDS BORROWED HAD ITA NO.2213/AHD/2005 9 BEEN CAPITALISED WITH THE RELATED PROJECT COST AND HAD NOT BEEN CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATI ON. EVEN OTHERWISE THE REVENUE HAVE NOT PLACED BEFORE ANY MATERIAL IN ORDER TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF INTEREST AND THE BORROWINGS HAD BEEN MADE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND AS PER THE CLAUSES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES ESPECIALLY WHEN REVENUE HAVE NOT PL ACED BEFORE ANY MATERIAL SO AS TO ENABLE US TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE MAT TER WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THER EFORE GROUND NO.2 IN THE APPEAL IS ALSO DISMISSED. 10. GROUND NOS. 3 &4 BEING GENERAL IN NATUR E DO NOT REQUIRE ANY SEPARATE ADJUDICATION AND ARE THEREFORE DISMI SSED. 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON21-05-20 10 SD/- SD/- (D T GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A N PAHUJA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 21-05-2010 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. M/S SHREE PARSHWANATH CORPORATION 50 HARISIDHA CHAMBER ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD 2. THE ACIT CIRCLE-9 AHMEDABAD 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A)-XV AHMEDABAD 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD