Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an assessee who had valued closing stock at market price in the previous year could, in the succeeding year, revalue the same stock at purchase cost for the purpose of computing trading profit or loss.
Analysis: The assessee had elected in the earlier year to adopt market value for closing stock and had been assessed on that basis. In the succeeding year, the same stock could not be reopened at a higher purchase figure merely because it represented historical cost. On mercantile principles, the opening stock for the later year must be taken at the value fixed and accepted in the earlier year's accounts, unless mistake in that valuation is shown. Permitting a return to purchase cost would allow the same loss to be claimed more than once and would distort the computation of the year's true trading result.
Conclusion: The assessee was bound by the previous year's market valuation of the stock and was not entitled to substitute purchase price in the succeeding year; the adjustment made by the Revenue was in principle and the answer was against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by holding that the opening stock had to be taken at the earlier accepted market value, so the Revenue's method of computation stood confirmed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee has elected and been accepted to value closing stock at market price in one year, the same stock must be brought forward at that value in the next year for computing true trading profits, unless the earlier valuation is shown to be mistaken.