ROXY INDUSTRIAL CORP. vs. C I T
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the assessee was not justified in valuing its stock at the price realized from selling it as scrap/junk. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. British Paints India Limited, which vests discretion with the assessee to determine stock value based on actual cost or market value, choosing the lower of the two. This discretion allows for adopting market value if it has drastically fallen. However, in the present case, it was not the appellant's contention that the market value of the stock had drastically fallen. Therefore, the assessee had no option but to depict the market value of the stock on the basis of its valuation at cost. By alleging that the stock was sold as scrap/junk and valuing it at the realized price, the assessee adopted an option clearly not available under the Supreme Court's ruling. Consequently, the appeal was found to have no merit.
What were the facts?
The appellant, Roxy Industrial Corporation, filed an appeal challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated November 14, 2007. The ITAT's order was based on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. British Paints India Limited. The core of the dispute revolves around the valuation of stock. The assessee had valued its stock at the price realized from selling it as scrap/junk, rather than adhering to the permissible methods of valuation based on actual cost or market value. The revenue's contention, upheld by the ITAT, was that this method of valuation was not open to the assessee.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessee was justified in valuing its stock at the price realized from selling it as scrap/junk, when the Supreme Court in CIT vs. British Paints India Limited held that stock valuation can be based on actual cost or market value, with the option to choose the lower value. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The appeal is dismissed based on the facts presented and the legal precedent. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the ITAT's order, argued that the assessee's method of valuing stock as scrap/junk was not permissible under the law, as laid down by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. British Paints India Limited. The revenue contended that the assessee did not have the option to value stock at a price realized from selling it as scrap/junk, especially when the market value had not drastically fallen.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA No.822 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision:-13.1.2009 Roxy Industrial Corporation.
---Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Ludhiana. ---Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present:- Mr.Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the appellant. J.S.KHEHAR, J.(ORAL) Through the instant appeal, the appellant has impugned the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 14.11.2007 (Annexure A3). The order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 14.11.2007 is based on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in C.I.T. Versus British Paints India Limited, 188 ITR 44 wherein it has been laid down that a discretion is vested with the assessee to determine, the value of the stock, either on the basis of the actual costs thereof or at the market value thereof, with a further discretion to calculate the value of stock on the basis of the chosen option. By exercising the above option, the assessee has the right to choose the method by which two stocks are assessed at the lower value. In so far as the assessment of the cost at market value is concerned, the same can be adopted to show lower value of the stock in hand if the market value of such stock is shown to have drastically fallen. Since in so far as the present controversy is concerned, it is not the case of the appellant
ITA No.822 of 2008 2 that the market value of the stock in question had drastically fallen, there was no option at the hands of the assessee except to depict the market value of the stock on the basis of valuation of stock in trade at cost. Rather than adopting the sole option, which was available to the assessee, the assessee alleged that he had sold the stock as scrap/junk and had assessed the value thereof at the price realized by selling the stock as scrap/junk. This option was clearly not open to the assessee in terms of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of British Paints India Limited's (supra). In view of the above, we find no merit in the instant appeal and the same is dismissed. (J.S.Khehar) Judge (Nawab Singh) 13.1.2009 Judge AS
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
