Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds valuation method for closing stock, allows revaluation for opening stock.</h1> <h3>Inspecting Commissioner Of Income-Tax. Versus Vummitti Subramaniam Chetty.</h3> The tribunal upheld the rejection of the assessee's method of valuing closing stock of silverware and raw silver as it did not reflect accurate income. ... Profits And Gains Issues Involved:1. Undervaluation of closing stock of silverware and raw silver.2. Method of valuation of base stock.3. Consistency in the method of valuation from previous years.4. Impact of change in the constitution of the firm.5. Legal precedents and their applicability.6. Revaluation of opening stock.Detailed Analysis:1. Undervaluation of Closing Stock of Silverware and Raw Silver:The primary issue in this case is the addition of Rs. 7,51,629 made by the IAC (Assessment), Range-IV, Madras, due to the alleged undervaluation of the closing stock of silverware and raw silver by the assessee. The assessee had been valuing the base stock of silverware at Rs. 694 per kg and raw silver at Rs. 550 per kg for several years. The IAC rejected this method, stating that there was no basis for adopting the same value for the base stock over time and no conclusive evidence that the base stock remained in the closing stock and was not disposed of. The IAC revalued the silverwares and raw silver at the rates adopted for other stocks, resulting in the addition.2. Method of Valuation of Base Stock:The CIT (A) accepted the assessee's method of valuation, noting that it had been consistently followed since the assessment year 1974-75 and accepted by the department. The CIT (A) found the IAC's reasons for rejecting the method unconvincing, particularly the claim about family disputes affecting the firm's constitution. The CIT (A) emphasized that there was no dissolution or termination of the business, just a change in the firm's constitution, which did not necessitate revaluation of the stock-in-trade.3. Consistency in the Method of Valuation from Previous Years:The assessee argued that the method of valuing the base stock had been consistently followed and accepted by the department from the assessment year 1974-75 to 1984-85. The departmental representative contended that the acceptance of the method in earlier years did not prevent the department from examining its correctness for the year under appeal. The representative highlighted the significant rise in the price of raw silver over the years, arguing that the method did not reflect the true income, profits, and gains of the business for the year under appeal.4. Impact of Change in the Constitution of the Firm:The IAC's assessment noted a change in the firm's constitution due to family disputes, suggesting that this necessitated a revaluation of the base stock. However, the CIT (A) pointed out that the change was merely due to the retirement of six partners, with the remaining partners continuing the business. The CIT (A) found the IAC's observations about family disputes and the need for revaluation factually incorrect.5. Legal Precedents and Their Applicability:The departmental representative relied on several legal precedents to support the rejection of the assessee's method of valuation, including cases like Patrick v. Broadstone Mills Ltd., CIT v. Chari and Ram, and CIT v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar. The assessee's representative argued that these cases were not applicable as they related to dissolution of partnerships, which was not the case here. The tribunal referred to the decision in Broadstone Mills Ltd.'s case, which held that the base stock method was not appropriate for income-tax assessment as it did not reflect the true profits of the year.6. Revaluation of Opening Stock:The assessee's alternative submission was that if the base stock of silverware and raw silver were to be revalued at the same rates as other stocks, the opening stock should also be revalued similarly. The tribunal found merit in this submission and directed the IAC (Assessment) to verify the correctness of the workings provided by the assessee's counsel and make the necessary adjustments.Conclusion:The tribunal concluded that the departmental authorities were justified in rejecting the assessee's method of valuation of closing stock for the base stock of silverware and raw silver as it did not reflect the true income, profits, and gains for the year under appeal. However, the tribunal accepted the assessee's alternative submission regarding the revaluation of the opening stock and directed the IAC (Assessment) to verify the correctness of the workings and make the necessary adjustments. The appeal by the Revenue was thus partly allowed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found