2013 (12) TMI 239 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of undervaluation of closing stock of land The company M/s. Amritsar Rayon and Silk Mills P. Ltd. filed a suit against the assessee on March 11, 2006 which had an adverse impact on the market value of the impugned asset - The assessee had paid Rs. 70 lakhs to M/s. Amritsar Rayon and Silk Mills P. Ltd. - Held that - The Legal dispute has adversely impacted the price of land - The assessee had paid Rs. 70 lakhs to M/s. Amritsar Rayon and Silk Mills P. Ltd. and finally the matter was settled at Rs. 2.30 crores - M/s. Amritsar Rayon and Silk Mills P. Ltd. had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,08,00,000 being the double of advance amount paid as earnest money to the tune of Rs. 54 lakhs - The Revenue, itself did not challenge the opening stock of the impugned asset in the subsequent assessment year, while passing the assessment order under section 143(3), and accepted the same. There is no change in the method of valuing of the closing stock - As cost or market price whichever is less was consistently followed The copy tax audit report for the assessment year 2006-07 filed shows method of valuation of closing stock as cost or net realizable value whichever is less - Against the column details of deviation, if any from the method of valuation prescribed under section 145A and effect thereof on the profit and loss it is clearly mentioned nil This shows that there was no change in method of valuation of closing stock Decided against Revenue.

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 75,00,000 on account of undervaluation of closing stock of land.
2. Basis for the valuation of closing stock.
3. Method of valuation of closing stock.
4. Impact of legal dispute on the valuation of land.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 75,00,000 on Account of Undervaluation of Closing Stock of Land:
The Revenue contended that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 75,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer due to the undervaluation of closing stock of land. The Assessing Officer had argued that the civil suit filed near the end of the financial year would not impact the value of the land as of March 31, 2006. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reversed this addition, considering the legal dispute and its impact on the land's market value.

2. Basis for the Valuation of Closing Stock:
The Revenue argued that the assessee did not provide a basis for arriving at the figure of Rs. 75,00,000 for the undervaluation. The assessee countered that due to the legal dispute over the land, its market value had decreased, justifying the reduced valuation. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the assessee's explanation that the legal dispute adversely impacted the land's price, thus supporting the reduced valuation.

3. Method of Valuation of Closing Stock:
The Assessing Officer claimed that the assessee was not permitted to change the method of valuation of closing stock from the cost price method to any other method. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that the assessee consistently followed the method of valuing closing stock as cost or market price, whichever is less, and there was no deviation from this method. The tax audit report for the assessment year 2006-07 confirmed this consistent valuation method.

4. Impact of Legal Dispute on the Valuation of Land:
The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) noted that the legal dispute over the land, which was in the front of a larger piece of land intended for colony development, significantly impacted its market value. The court had granted a stay, which was confirmed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, preventing the assessee from developing the land. This legal encumbrance justified the reduced valuation of the land by Rs. 75,00,000. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concluded that the assessee's valuation was correct and that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was unjustified.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), finding no infirmity in the deletion of the addition of Rs. 75,00,000. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. The cross-objections of the assessee, being supportive of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s findings, were also dismissed. The judgment emphasized the legal and factual considerations impacting the valuation of the closing stock of land due to the ongoing legal dispute.

← Previous Next →