L.G. Balakrishnan Vs. Cit

L.G. Balakrishnan vs Cit

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 01, 2001

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/829256

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/829256
Court: Chennai High Court
Decided On: Oct 01, 2001
Case Number: Tax Case No. 1166 of 1988 1 October 2002 A.Y. 1982-83
Subject: Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Counsels: P.P.S. Janarthanaraja, for the Assessee Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Revenue Head Note: INCOME TAX Accounting method--VALUATION OF STOCKChicks Catch Note: Assessee running poultry-farm--Birds as well as chicks treated as stock-in-trade--After rejecting assessee's claim that chicks are capital assets...

Key legal issue: Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

L.G. Balakrishnan

Advocate P.P.S. Janarthanaraja, <i>for the Assessee </i>Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, <i>for the Revenue</i>

Respondent

Cit

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)176CTR(Mad)394

Excerpt

.....assets, and that, therefore, were required to be valued as part of the stock-in-trade of the assessee. that question as to whether the tribunal was right in holding that the chicks do not constitute the fixed assets of the assessee's poultry business is therefore, answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. as regards the other question regarding the valuation of the stock of the chicks, the tribunal's view cannot be sustained. it is settled law that in case of running business the stock-in-trade has to be valued either on cost basis or on the basis of market price, whichever is lower. case law analysis: sakthi trading co. v. cit (2001) 23 dtc 128 (sc) : (2001) 250 itr 871 (sc) followed. application: also to current assessment year. decision: partly in favour of assessee. income tax act 1961 s.145 income tax act 1961 s.43(3) in the madras high court r. jayasimha babu & a.k. rajan, jj. - constitution of india article 141; [a.p. shah, c.j., f.m. ibrahim kaliffulla &v. ramasubramanian, jj] reference to larger bench - precedent - full bench decision held, it is binding on the division bench. only if the full bench comes to conclusion that earlier full bench decision is incorrect, there is scope for making reference to larger bench. division bench doubting correctness of full bench decision cannot direct registry for placing papers before chief justice to make reference to larger bench. .....the stock of the, chicks, the tribunal's view cannot be sustained. it is settled law that in case of running business the stock-in-trade has to be valued either on cost basis or on the basis of market price, whichever is lower. the apex court recently had occasion to review the case law on this aspect in the case of sakthi trading co v. cit : [2001]250itr871(sc) . the court therein noticed the earlier decisions of the apex court which had held that the valuation should be on that basis, the decisions so referred to being the cases of a.l.a. firm v. cit : [1991]189itr285(sc) , chainrup sampatram v. cit : [1953]24itr481(sc) and sir kikabhai premchand v. cit : [1953]24itr506(sc) . the supreme court in the case of sakthi trading co. v. cit (supra) after the review of the law held as under :'even as per the principles laid down in a.l.a. firm's case (supra) in such a case the closing stock is to be valued at the cost or market price, whichever is lower. that is an established rule of commercial practice and accountancy.'4. the answer to the second question as to whether the opening stock of the chicks as also the closing stock should be on the basis of realisable value is, therefore, answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Full Judgment

R. Jayasima Babu, J.

The assessee is running a poultry-farm. The birds as wed as chicks were treated as stock-in-trade. After rejecting the assessee's claim that the chicks are capital assets, the assessing officer valued the stock of the chicks at market rate and the Commissioner (Appeals) on appeal held that the chicks were assets. The Tribunal held that the chicks were not capital assets and that they form part of the stock, required to be valued on the basis of the realisable value. The assessment year is 1982-83.

2. The correctness of this finding of the Tribunal has been called into question before us. Having regard to the amendment of the definition of the word 'plant' in section 43(3) of the Income Tax Act, with effect from 1-4-1962, which amendment has been effected by the Finance Act, 1995, it must be held that the Tribunal was quite right in holding that the birds being 'livestock' could not be regarded as capital assets, and that, therefore, were required to be valued as part of the stock-in-trade of the assessee. That question as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the chicks do not constitute the fixed assets of the assessee's poultry business is therefore, answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

3. As regards the other question regarding the valuation of the stock of the, chicks, the Tribunal's view cannot be sustained. It is settled law that in case of running business the stock-in-trade has to be valued either on cost basis or on the basis of market price, whichever is lower. The Apex Court recently had occasion to review the case law on this aspect in the case of Sakthi Trading Co v. CIT : [2001]250ITR871(SC) . The court therein noticed the earlier decisions of the Apex Court which had held that the valuation should be on that basis, the decisions so referred to being the cases of A.L.A. Firm v. CIT : [1991]189ITR285(SC) , Chainrup Sampatram v. CIT : [1953]24ITR481(SC) and Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT : [1953]24ITR506(SC) . The Supreme Court in the case of Sakthi Trading Co. v. CIT (supra) after the review of the law held as under :

'Even as per the principles laid down in A.L.A. Firm's case (supra) in such a case the closing stock is to be valued at the cost or market price, whichever is lower. That is an established rule of commercial practice and accountancy.'

4. The answer to the second question as to whether the opening stock of the chicks as also the closing stock should be on the basis of realisable value is, therefore, answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2001 Same Parties L.G. Balakrishnan vs Cit Same Subject Direct Taxation

Direct Taxation