2010 (12) TMI 1054 - HC - Income Tax

Accounting Method - Completed contract method for accounting followed by the assessee for his construction business - The respondent/assessee was regularly following the completed contract method and had not given scope for any complaint in any of the earlier years it was unnecessary for the Assessing Officer to invoke Section 145(3) of the Act - The Tribunal in regard to the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. N.M.Associates the assessee did not maintain proper accounts which apparently persuaded the Assessing Authority to invoke Section 145(3) of the Act by which the calculation of annual profits on the basis of receipts was held to be justified - Hence fully concur with the conclusion of the Tribunal - Thus the appeal fails and the same is dismissed against of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of accounting method for construction business under Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2003-2004.

Analysis:
The main issue in this case revolves around the method of accounting to be followed by the assessee for its construction business for the assessment year 2003-2004. The Revenue challenged the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, arguing that the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the completed contract method of accounting used by the assessee. The Revenue contended that this method did not accurately reflect the profits of the business as it did not include profits from incomplete projects.

The assessee, engaged in building construction, followed the mercantile system of accounting and utilized the completed contract method for ongoing projects. Under this method, income was assessed in the year the contract was completed. However, the Assessing Authority took a different stance, citing Section 5 of the Income-tax Act, and required the assessee to disclose accrued profits from ongoing projects up to the relevant assessment year. This decision was influenced by a previous court ruling.

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the assessment order, but the Tribunal overturned it. The Tribunal emphasized that for the Assessing Officer to disturb the existing accounting system under Section 145(3) of the Act, there must be dissatisfaction with the accounts' correctness or completeness and a deviation from regular accounting practices by the assessee. Since there was no such dissatisfaction expressed previously, the Tribunal found no grounds for invoking Section 145(3) in this case.

The Tribunal's decision was supported by the High Court, which agreed that the Assessing Officer had no basis to disrupt the completed contract method followed by the assessee. The Court highlighted the importance of adherence to statutory provisions and regular accounting practices. It concluded that there was no need to entertain the Revenue's substantial question of law, ultimately dismissing the appeal without costs.