Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
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
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