9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 933X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, the Tribunal order is unsustainable and perverse, while overlooking the 'Material on Record' and rejecting the consistency and regularity of the method of valuation, particularly while there is an erroneous assumption and application of jurisdiction, without invoking the provisions of Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (ii) Whether the decision of CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 55 is a binding precedent for the principles of law regarding the method of valuation of stock?" 2. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B' (hereinafter referred as "the ITAT"), in its order dated 27.09.2011, has found that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) had reached to the conclusion that the closing stock has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Firm Vs. CIT; (1991) 189 ITR (SC) following earlier judgement in Chainrup Sampatram Vs. CIT; (1953) 24 ITR 481 (SC), the ITAT set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and upheld the order of the A.O. 5. As regards the question No.(i) framed as substantial question of law is whether "Material on Record" could be overlooked, we have already given our thoughtful consideration to the said aspect and find that the record material for assessing the value of stock has to be based on the market rate. However, in the present case, on facts, the A.O. has assessed it on the basis of the price on which the goods had been sold by the Assessee. If the market rate assessment is done, the tax effect could have been much more i.e. on the basis of amount o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has not been computed in accordance with the standards notified under sub-section (2)], the Assessing Officer may make an assessment in the manner provided in section 144.]" 7. In the present case, the valuation of stock has changed on account of the change in market price as well as change in the sale price, the average market could not have been taken up by the Assessee because the sale price of goods could not change in every year. 8. Keeping in view the above, we are in agreement with the view taken by the A.O. and affirmed by the ITAT and answer question No. (i) in favour of respondent-revenue. 9. As regards question No.(ii) framed by this Court for adjudication, we find that the decision of CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd.; (199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
