Case Details

Citation(s)
1977 SLG 1038 1977 SLD 1038 (1977) 107 ITR 702

CASE REFERRED No. 15 OF 1971 DECEMBER 20, 1972
GOPAL RAO EKBOTE, C.J. AND CHENNAKESAVA REDDY, J.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Krishna Mining Co.

Law:

Section:

Section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Method of accounting - Valuation of stock - Assessment year 1960-61 - Assessee firm was carrying on its business in mica-mining - ITO held that end product of crude mica was cut mica alone and waste rounds being of inferior quality had to be valued on basis of wages paid for picking them up from waste scrap and at rate of cut mica - Tribunal rejected valuation made by ITO and held that end product of crude mica was not only cut mica but also splitting and rounds and same should be valued bearing in mind expenditure incurred on them on mining as well as processing - Whether method of valuation of stock adopted by Tribunal was correct - Held, yes Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 33(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Assessment year 1960-61 - Powers of Tribunal are limited to subject-matter of appeal and, hence, its decisions must be confined, as in case of other judicial or quasi-judicial Tribunals, to questions brought before it on appeal, and it must not travel outside it - Held, yes - ITO rejected valuation of closing stock made by assessee and after revaluing stock made addition - AAC affirmed addition - Assessee appealed to Tribunal for deleting addition - Tribunal adopted different method of valuation which resulted in reduction of profit instead of addition - Whether when assessee never claimed further deduction of profit either before ITO or before AAC or even before Tribunal, it was not subject-matter of appeal and, consequently, Tribunal had no jurisdiction to allow further deduction of profit to assessee - Held, yes FACTS The assessee firm was carrying on business in mica mining. The closing stock of the assessee-firm consisted of three items, viz., crude mica, cut mica and waste rounds. The assessee valued crude mica at the mining cost and cut mica splittings and waste rounds at the mining cost plus the processing cost. The ITO however, thought that the method adopted by the assessee did not bring out the true cost of cut mica. His opinion was that the only end product of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492