TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the valuation of the closing stock was not on the average cost price, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer was justified in taking the price submitted by the marketing inspector for valuation of the closing stock. - - - - - Dated:- 10-11-2004 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGRAWAL., VIKRAM NATH. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by R.K. Agrawal J.- In the present appeal, filed under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the appellant alleges that five substantial questions of law arise out of the order dated December 4, 2002 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, relating to the assessment year 1991-92. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has also failed. We have heard Sri S.D. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Shambhoo Chopra, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant had valued the closing stock on the average cost price which is a well accepted principle of valuation and, therefore, no addition was called for. Sri Shambhoo Chopra, learned standing counsel has, however, submitted that the closing stock has to be valued on cost price or on market price according to the discretion of the assessee. It cannot be any price in between. He further submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly applied the price certified by the marketing inspector while valuing the closing stock and the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the other side of the account at the time of their purchase, so that the cancelling out of the entries relating to the same stock from both sides of the account would leave only the transactions on which there have been actual sales in the course of the year showing the profit or loss actually realised on the year's trading." In the case of CIT v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 122, the apex court has held as follows: "We have already said that in England there is no provision which compels that tax officer to adopt in the computation of income the system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. But whatever may be the system, whether it is cash or mercantile, as observed by Croom Johnson, J. in a trading venture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
