Unique Builders (Rama), Jaipur vs Assessee

Jh vkj-ih-rksykuh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Vh-vkj-ehuk] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM

vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 649 & 650/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2009-10

M/s. Unique Builders cuke The DCIT (Rama) C-116, Janpath, Lal Vs. Central Circle- 2 Kothi Scheme, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACFU 0823 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Manish Agarwal, CA & Shri Javed Khan, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Mrs. Rolee Agarwal, CIT - DR

lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/11/2014 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 16/01/2015

vkns'k@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM

Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee against

common order of the ld. CIT(A)- Central, Jaipur dated 02-05-2012 for

the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 wherein various grounds are

raised but in effect the main grounds are as under:-

(i) upholding the rejection of books of account u/s 145(3) of the Act.

2 ITA No.649/JP/2012 M/s. Unique Builders (Rama) vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Jaipur .

(ii) applying percentage completion method in place of project completion method followed by the assessee,.

(iii) making addition of Rs. 2,98,230/- for assessment year 2008-09 and Rs. 3,21,705/- for the assessment year 2009-10 by above change of method

2.1 The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset contends that the

issue in question is squarely covered by ITAT Jaipur Bench consolidated

order dated 14-03-2013 in the assessee's own group cases i.e. M/s.

Unique Builders & Developers vs. DCIT (ITA Nos. 73 to 77/JP/12, 689

to 690/JP/12 for assessment year 2003-04 to 2006-07, 2009-10, 2007-08

& 2008-09) and Unique Builders & Developers (Krishna) (ITA No. 78 to

80/JP/12 for the assessment year 2007-08 to 2009-10) wherein the

rejection of books of account u/s 145(3) of the Act have been held to be

not proper and assessee's method of accounting i.e. project completion

method has been upheld by following observations by this Bench of

ITAT in its group cases (supra)

''13. Considering entire conspectus of the case in the light of the peculiar facts and findings reached herein before in this case, it is neither proper nor justified to hold that the books of account maintained by the assessee did not present true and complete picture of its accounts and financial transactions. It is a case where accounts of the assessee are correct and complete. Method of accounting and accounting standard has been regularly followed. True and correct profits of the business of the assessee could be deduced from such books of accounts. In this view of the matter the assessing authority 3 ITA No.649/JP/2012 M/s. Unique Builders (Rama) vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Jaipur .

could not change the method regularly adopted by the assessee from Project Completion Method to Percentage Completion Method on irrelevant considerations. We, are, therefore, satisfied that provisions of section 145(3) are not attracted in this case. The learned CIT(A), is found to have erred in upholding the decision of learned Assessing Authority to invoke section 145(3) of the Act and making assessment in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the decision in this regard and allow ground Nos. 2 & 3 raised in appeal by the assessee in assessment year 2003-04.

14. In the light of our decision in assessee's appeal, the grounds raised in appeal by revenue become infructuous and stand rejected.

15. Parties have fairly admitted that there being identical facts in the appeals for the assessment years 2004-05 to 09-10 and identical issues have been raised, the same may therefore be disposed off in the light of decision and conclusions that is taken for assessment year 2003-04. That being so the facts and circumstances being parameteria same in assessment years 2004-05 to 09-10 and no new fact or reasoning is shown to have been taken by the learned CIT(A) in taking the decision, we for the parity of reasons and respectively following our decision for assessment year 2003-04, allow assessee's ground Nos. 2 & 3 in all these years in appeal whereas Revenue's grounds in appeal for assessment years 2004-05 to 06-07 and 09-10 become infructuous and stand rejected. Charting of interest under section 234B being mandatory and consequential, the assessing authority shall re-compute the same accordingly.

16. In the result, all the appeals by assessee stand partly allowed and that by revenue stand dismissed. ''

2.2 The ld. DR is heard.

2.3 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials

available on record. The facts and circumstances of the assessee's case

and its other group cases are similar. Thus in view thereof and by

respectfully following the consolidated order referred above, we uphold 4 ITA No.649/JP/2012 M/s. Unique Builders (Rama) vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Jaipur .

the rejection of books of account of the assessee and method of

accounting of percentage completion method as followed by this Bench

of ITAT in assessee's group of cases. Thus in the entirety of the facts and

circumstances, the additions are deleted and the appeals of the assessee

are allowed.

3.0 In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Order pronounced in the open court on 16/01/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼Vh-vkj-ehuk½ ¼vkj-ih-rksykuh½ (T.R. Meena) (R.P.Tolani) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member

Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 16th January, 2015

*Mishra

vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs 'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- M/s. Unique Builders (Rama) aipur

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Jaipur .

3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A).

4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT, Jaipur

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No.649/JP/2012)

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar