M/S.SMITHKLINE BEECHAN CONSUMER vs. C.I.T.

PDF · subscribers
ITR/92/1995HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01032640199522 December 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's opinion regarding the inclusion of certain indirect expenses in the closing stock. The question raised by the assessee was answered in line with a previous order on similar matters.

What were the facts?

The petitions before the High Court involved common issues concerning the valuation of closing stock. The parties agreed that the sole issue was the valuation of closing stock.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the correct method for valuing closing stock, specifically whether indirect expenses should be included.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

**** 201

Date of Decision: 22.12.2025 1. ITR-92-1995 (O&M)

M/S.SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD.

...Petitioner Versus

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

...Respondent

2.

ITR-27-1996

M/S.SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD.

...Petitioner Versus

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL

Present:- Mr. Rohit Jain (through V.C.) with Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner

Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel with

Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Counsel and

Ms. Kavita Advocate

for respondent-Income Tax Department

***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. 2.

Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that sole issue involved in the instant reference is valuation of closing stock. This Court vide order dated 27.11.2025 passed in ITR No.62-65 of 1995 has upheld opinion of Tribunal with respect to inclusion of few indirect expenses in the closing stock. DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.23 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

ITR-92-1995 and ITR-27-1996

-2- 3.

In the wake of statement of both sides, question raised by assessee is answered in terms of order passed in ITR No.62-65 of 1995. 4.

Disposed of in above terms. 5.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)

JUDGE

(AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL)

JUDGE December 22, 2025 Deepak DPA

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable

Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.23 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →