Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2002 (11) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue of fixed assets and debtors wherein there was loss which has to be set aside against any likely gain out of stock transfer. (v) That provision of s. 45 applies to all the assets that are transferred on dissolution of the firm and the AO erred in isolating only the stock for the purpose of computation. (vi) That the matter deserves reconsideration since it involves substantial calculations of market value of all assets and only then any profit or loss can be arrived at. 2. Since all the grounds relate to valuation of closing stock of the firm which is dissolved but the same business was continued as a proprietary concern as such, all the grounds are adjudicated simultaneously. 3. The assessee has filed the return of income for 1992-93....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g stock at market price by adding GP rate shown was Rs. 10,73,936, as such, difference was Rs. 49,285 in valuation of closing stock and directed for charging interest under ss. 234B, 234C and initiated penalty under s. 271(1)(c). 6. In the first appeal before learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. While dismissing the appeal the learned CIT(A) has relied on the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT, Madras High Court Decision reported in 158 Taxation 119 and also the decision of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Nathulal Jawaharchand (1997) 227 ITR 251 (MP). 7. In the appeal before us, the learned counsel of the assessee argued before us that the firm was d....