A.L.A. Firm v. CIT

189 ITR 285Supreme Court of India1991#807 most cited

What is A.L.A. Firm v. CIT authority for?

Under the unamended Section 147(b), 'information' for reopening an assessment includes material already on record that comes to the Assessing Officer's notice subsequent to the original assessment, not just material extraneous to the record.

128

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

A.L.A. Firm v. CIT · 189 ITR 285 · Section 147(b) · reopening of assessment · information for reassessment · material on record · subsequent notice · change of opinion · escapement of income · unamended Section 147

Also reported as

55 Taxmann 497

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 147Section 250Section 151Section 144Section 69ASection 10(38)

Issues it is cited on

section 147(b)true and full disclosurefull and true disclosurefirst proviso to section 147kelvinatormere change of opinionlive linkchange of opiniontangible materialreopening of assessmentescapement of incomereason to believe

Judgments citing A.L.A. Firm v. CIT

Shri Bimal Paul, Silchar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Silchar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 211/GTY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GAUHATI BENCH VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bimal Paul, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Prop. M/s. Lokenath Silchar, Assam Enterprise Rice Market, Vs. Fatak Bazar, Silchar- 788001, Assam (PAN: AJMPP9568K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT Date of Hearing : 17.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 06.10.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Both the captioned appeals fi…

Shrimati Amarjit Kaur W/O Bugar Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Mansa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 49

…nitiate proceeding under section 147 and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued. ” b) A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC) 13 Amarjit Kaur v. ITO The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reassess income arises if he has, in consequence of specific and relevant information coming into his possession subsequent to the previous concluded assessment, reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was held that even if the informati…

M/S Blue City Township & Colonizers, Amritsar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar

ITA 90/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 69

…istered post which was duly served upon the Appellant company as the receipt is being acknowledged under the Appellant Company stamp. In a series of decided cases of ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Limited.291 ITR 500 SC, A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC), Raymond Woollen Mills Limited. Vs ITO 236 ITR 34 SC, Gurera Gas Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 258 ITR 170 P&H, Jawand Sons Vs. CIT 326 ITR 39 P&H, Sewak Ram Vs ITO 236 CTR 462 (P&H), Aditya and Co. Vs CIT 279 ITR 47 P&H, Tilak Raj Bedi Vs. JCIT 319 ITR 385 P&H, Pb. State Cooperative Agriculture Dev Bank Vs. CIT 207 CTR 352 P&H, Grover Nur…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4564/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…stock at the close of an accounting period is a necessary part of the process of determining the trading results of that period, and can in no sense be regarded as the “source” of such profits.” 64. The Supreme Court in the case of A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT (1991) (189 ITR 285) (SC) has observed that closing stock cannot be valued at a market value higher than the cost as that will result in taxation of the notional profits which the assessee has not realised. The relevant extract of the judgement of the Supreme Court is reproduced below: “The valuation of the closing stock at market value invariably will create a prob…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3645/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…stock at the close of an accounting period is a necessary part of the process of determining the trading results of that period, and can in no sense be regarded as the “source” of such profits.” 64. The Supreme Court in the case of A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT (1991) (189 ITR 285) (SC) has observed that closing stock cannot be valued at a market value higher than the cost as that will result in taxation of the notional profits which the assessee has not realised. The relevant extract of the judgement of the Supreme Court is reproduced below: “The valuation of the closing stock at market value invariably will create a prob…

DCIT-14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3147/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2009-10
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…cision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of PVS Beedies Ltd cannot be made applicable to the facts of the assessee herein. 9.1. The ld. DR before us also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of A.L.A Firm vs. CIT reported in 189 ITR 285. On perusal of the said decision, the facts involved thereon was that there was a firm in Malaya which got dissolved. That firm had revalued its assets. That firm had distributed the assets to its partners. The question was whether revaluation was chargeable to tax or not? The entire decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court rendered on the pretext t…

Idea Cellular Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Hq (Judl) to CIT-14, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2350/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2009-10
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…cision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of PVS Beedies Ltd cannot be made applicable to the facts of the assessee herein. 9.1. The ld. DR before us also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of A.L.A Firm vs. CIT reported in 189 ITR 285. On perusal of the said decision, the facts involved thereon was that there was a firm in Malaya which got dissolved. That firm had revalued its assets. That firm had distributed the assets to its partners. The question was whether revaluation was chargeable to tax or not? The entire decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court rendered on the pretext t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dhadda International, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 6692/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6408/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6409/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/s. Dhadda International, vs. ACIT, Circle 48 (1), 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, New Delhi. Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AAAFD0928J) ITA No.6691/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6692/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ACIT, Circle 48 (1), vs. M/s. Dhadda International, New Delhi. 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AA…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dhadda International, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 6691/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6408/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6409/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/s. Dhadda International, vs. ACIT, Circle 48 (1), 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, New Delhi. Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AAAFD0928J) ITA No.6691/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6692/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ACIT, Circle 48 (1), vs. M/s. Dhadda International, New Delhi. 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AA…

M/S Dhadda International, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 6409/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6408/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6409/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/s. Dhadda International, vs. ACIT, Circle 48 (1), 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, New Delhi. Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AAAFD0928J) ITA No.6691/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6692/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ACIT, Circle 48 (1), vs. M/s. Dhadda International, New Delhi. 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AA…

M/S Dhadda International, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 6408/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6408/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6409/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/s. Dhadda International, vs. ACIT, Circle 48 (1), 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, New Delhi. Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AAAFD0928J) ITA No.6691/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITA No.6692/Del./2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) ACIT, Circle 48 (1), vs. M/s. Dhadda International, New Delhi. 1992, Ground Floor, Naughara, Kinari Bazar, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AA…

Kali Bmh Systems Pvt. Ltd., Kumbakonam vs. DCIT, Circle - 2 (1), Trichy

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 864/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.864/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kali Bmh Systems P. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 42/6, B2, Chennai Road, Vs. Income Tax, Melacauvery, Kumbakonam 612 002. Circle 2(1), Trichy. [Pan:Aadck0974H]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 47

…rly, instead of being paid in cash, choose his capital to be discharged, wholly or partly, by being allotted a particular asset/s. A revaluation in such a case may follow; 8 I.T.A. No.864/Chny/20 would, rather, even as explained in A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC), be desirable in-as-much as it enables the partners to settle their accounts on a more realistic basis. The (Income Tax) law recognizes such situations, contemplating it to be a transfer of the specified asset by the firm to the partner/s (or vice-a-versa, in the event of introduction of an asset by a partner in the firm), deeming in case of…

Shri Baljinder Singh, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bathinda

In the result, both the appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

ITA 148/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. K. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69A

…and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued.” Manjit Kaur & Baljinder Singh v. ITO b) A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC) The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reassess income arises if he has, in consequence of specific and relevant information coming into his possession subsequent to the previous concluded assessment, reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was held that even if the information be such that it could…

Shrimati Manjit Kaur, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), Bathinda

In the result, both the appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

ITA 147/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. K. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69A

…and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued.” Manjit Kaur & Baljinder Singh v. ITO b) A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC) The jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer to reassess income arises if he has, in consequence of specific and relevant information coming into his possession subsequent to the previous concluded assessment, reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was held that even if the information be such that it could…

M/S. Orissa Mining Corporation Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 37/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiam/S Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd., Omc House, Post Box No.34, Bhubaneswar-01 Pan No.Aaaco 3324 L …………….. Assessee Versus Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar ………………Revenue

Section 147

…reopening or not and how the same could be ascertained from the records itself for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2016-17, is squarely covered by various judgements. In this regard, reliance is placed on the following decisions: a) In the case of A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT (189 ITR 285), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has explained the legal position as under:- "This paragraph does not in any way affect the principle enumerated in the two Madras cases cited with approval in Anandji Haridas [1986] 21 S.T.C. 326. Even making allowances for this limitation placed on the observations in Kalyanji Mavji, the position as summarized by the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7214/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 147

…onouncements. CIT(A) had given careful thought on all these aspects and upheld the action of the AO on reopening of the assessment. CIT(A) had relied on the following judicial pronouncements. a). Phoolchand Bajranglal Vs ITO 203ITR 456,477 b). ALA Firm Vs CIT 189 ITR 285,298 c). Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society Vs CIT 119 ITR 996, 1004 d). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 ,445 3.4 However while dealing on account of ‘under invoicing’ of goods exported CIT(A) deleted the addition without appreciating that said addition is made as per the comparable export price which is as determined by Hon’ble Justice M.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7213/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 147

…onouncements. CIT(A) had given careful thought on all these aspects and upheld the action of the AO on reopening of the assessment. CIT(A) had relied on the following judicial pronouncements. a). Phoolchand Bajranglal Vs ITO 203ITR 456,477 b). ALA Firm Vs CIT 189 ITR 285,298 c). Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society Vs CIT 119 ITR 996, 1004 d). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 ,445 3.4 However while dealing on account of ‘under invoicing’ of goods exported CIT(A) deleted the addition without appreciating that said addition is made as per the comparable export price which is as determined by Hon’ble Justice M.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7212/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 147

…onouncements. CIT(A) had given careful thought on all these aspects and upheld the action of the AO on reopening of the assessment. CIT(A) had relied on the following judicial pronouncements. a). Phoolchand Bajranglal Vs ITO 203ITR 456,477 b). ALA Firm Vs CIT 189 ITR 285,298 c). Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society Vs CIT 119 ITR 996, 1004 d). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 ,445 3.4 However while dealing on account of ‘under invoicing’ of goods exported CIT(A) deleted the addition without appreciating that said addition is made as per the comparable export price which is as determined by Hon’ble Justice M.…

ACIT, Non Corporate Circle - 7(1), Chennai vs. A.Thiagarajan, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2112/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2112/Chny/2017 & C.O. No. 164/Chny/2017 [In Ita No.2112/Chny/2017] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Vs Mr. A.Thiagarajan The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Plot No.67, Akshya Colony, Non-Corporate Circle-7(1) Padi, Chennai-600 034. Chennai-600 098. Pan: Aabpt 1461F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent /Cross Objector) : Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.Cit अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, C.A ""यथ"क" ओर से/Respondent By : 04.04.2022 सुनवाईक"तार!ख/Date Of Hearing : 12. 04.2022 घोषणाक"तार!ख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: 04.04.2022
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37(1)

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Kelvinator India Ltd, when no change of opinion could be alleged on a factual situation. 2.5. The CIT (A) omitted to consider the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ALA firm vs CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC) which is in favour of the department. 3. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing it is prayed that the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) be set aside and that of the Assessing officer be restored. C.O. No.167/Chny/2017 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was President of M…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 4951/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. State Bank Of India, Dcit, Financial Reporting & Circle -2(2), Taxation Dept., Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Office Of The Dcit-2(2), M/S. State Bank Of India, R.No.545, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Accounts & Compliance M.K. Road, Dept., Vs. 14Th Floor, Mumbai- 400 020 Madam Cama Rd., Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, D.R
Section 14Section 14ASection 36Section 41(4)

…tock at the close of an accounting period is a necessary part of the process of determining the trading results of that period, and can in no sense be regarded as the "source" of such profits.” 64. The Supreme Court in the case of A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT (1991) (189 ITR 285) (SC) has observed that closing stock cannot be valued at a market value higher than the cost as that will result in taxation of 32 ITA No.3685/M/2013 & ITA No.4951/M/2013 M/s. State Bank of India the notional profits which the assessee has not realised. The relevant extract of the judgement of the Supreme Court is reproduced below: “The valuati…