2008 (4) TMI 186 - HC - Income Tax

Valuation of stock was inflated in the statement furnished to the bank for obtaining the maximum cash credit limit - Assessing Officer rejected this explanation of the assessee and made addition on account of the difference between the value of stock - Held that both authorities had taken into account the opening and closing stock of the last year and had rightly excluded the inflated stocks pertaining to the immediately preceding year approach of tribunal could not be said to be erroneous

Summary

Issues:
Valuation of opening stock for assessment year 2001-02.

Analysis:
The case involves a dispute over the valuation of opening stock for the assessment year 2001-02. The assessee, a firm engaged in manufacturing rubber flaps and retreading of tyres, declared a loss in its return. The Assessing Officer noted a significant difference between the value of stock declared by the assessee and the value of stock hypothecated with the bank for availing an overdraft facility. The Assessing Officer made an addition to the income of the assessee based on this difference.

On appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), the assessee argued that the inflated valuation of stock was due to financial constraints caused by the sudden closure of factory operations. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer but allowed relief to the assessee by reducing the difference in the valuation of closing stock by a similar difference in the opening stock. The Revenue, aggrieved by this decision, filed an appeal before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal. The Revenue contended that any relief granted for the valuation of opening stock would require a corresponding addition in the immediately preceding year. However, both the CIT(A) and the Tribunal held that the reduction should be allowed for the inflated cost pertaining to the opening stock, i.e., the closing stock of the last year, to avoid double addition. The Tribunal's approach was deemed appropriate, and it was concluded that no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to allow relief to the assessee by reducing the difference in the valuation of opening stock for the assessment year 2001-02.