Consistent accounting method and proper books barred any substantial question of law in the stock valuation dispute.

The Revenue's challenge to the assessee's accounting method failed because the Tribunal's findings were supported by the record: the assessee consistently followed the average cost method for valuing closing stock, maintained proper books of account, and showed no defect in purchases or sales. In the absence of any material showing non-compliance with notified accounting standards or a perversity in the factual findings, no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order. Acceptance of the same method in earlier years also supported the conclusion in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue had shown any substantial question of law arising from the Tribunal's finding that the assessee consistently followed the method of accounting, maintained proper books of account, and adopted the average cost method for valuation of closing stock.

Analysis: The assessment order was founded on a challenge to the method of accounting, but no material was shown to establish non-compliance with the notified standards or any defect in the books of account, purchases, or sales. The Tribunal had found that the assessee maintained proper books and that the average cost method for closing stock valuation had been followed consistently without deviation. In the absence of material to dislodge those findings, and given the acceptance of the method in earlier years, no substantial question of law arose.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's order failed; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---