2015 (2) TMI 1394 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake - Rejection of books of account of the assessee - method of accounting of percentage completion method rejected - HELD THAT - We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. We find merit in the arguments of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. This Bench of ITAT has followed the consolidated order in associated concerns thereby upholding the books of account maintained by the assessee as well as project completion method followed by it. The mistake as pointed out by the assessee amounts to mistake apparent from record - we uphold the books of account of the assessee and also uphold method of accounting of project 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. Except above, there is no change in the body of the order - MA of assessee allowed.

Summary

Issues: Correction of mistake apparent from record in the rejection of books of account and method of accounting.

In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur, the assessee filed applications pointing out a mistake apparent from the record regarding the rejection of books of account and the method of accounting. The counsel for the assessee argued that the ITAT had followed its earlier order in the assessee's group case, upholding the rejection of books of account and the project completion method. The ITAT, in para 2.3 of the order, stated that the facts and circumstances of the assessee's case and its group cases were similar, leading to the rejection of books of account and the accounting method being upheld. The assessee requested the correction of the term "rejection" to be omitted and to replace "percentage completion method" with "project completion method."

Upon hearing the arguments, the ITAT found merit in the assessee's contentions. The ITAT had followed a consolidated order in associated concerns, thereby upholding the books of account and the project completion method used by the assessee. The mistake pointed out by the assessee was considered apparent from the record, leading to the rectification of para 2.3 of the order under section 254(2) to reflect the correction. The ITAT upheld the books of account and the project completion method followed by the assessee in line with the consolidated ITAT order, resulting in the deletion of additions and allowing the appeals of the assessee. The rest of the order remained unchanged.

As a result, both Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee were allowed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 13/02/2015.