Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing Popular Workshops vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 19 December, 1985

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Bharath Auto Stores on 26 October, 1990

In Popular Workshops v. CIT , the principle that, on the dissolution of a firm, the stock-in-trade should be valued with reference to the market value and not the book value, was accepted by the Kerala High Court on the strength of the decisions in G. R. Ramachari and Co. v. CIT [1961] 41 ITR 142 (Mad) and A. L. A. Firm v. CIT . The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Venkata Subbaiah Chetty (V. C.)
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Makers Development Services Ltd. vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 1 January, 1991

Firm (supra) and also in the cases in V.C. Venkata Subbaiah Chetty & Sons (supra) and Popular Workshops (supra) on which a lot of store is Lald by went against the assessec because there was a dissolution of the firm and the assets were taken over by one of the partners or distributed amongst the partners. Such a procedure is even normally not followed when there is succession to the business as contemplated under Section 188 of the Income-tax Act.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 37 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

A.L.A. Firm vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madras on 21 February, 1991

The second question raises a more difficult problem. There can be no doubt that the decision of the Madras High Court in Ramachari squarely covers the situation. Ramachari holds that the principle of valuing the closing stock of a business at cost or market at the option of the assessee is a principle that would hold good only so long as there is a continuing business and that where a business is discontinued, whether on account of dissolution or closure or otherwise, by the assessee, then the profits cannot be ascertained except by taking the closing stock at market value. Ramachari has subsequently been followed by the Kerala High Court in Popular Workshops v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, [1987] 166 ITR 348 and in Popular Automobiles v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, [1989] 179 ITR 632.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 276 - Full Document

Lenses Centre vs Income Tax Officer on 23 March, 1996

The earlier decision in the case of Popular Workshops (supra) was sought to be reconsidered in the subsequent case of Popular Automobiles (supra) on the basis of some agreement express or implied for taking the stock at a particular figure. Their Lordships held that an agreement express or implied with reference to taking of accounts has been held to be applicable only to the case of a continuing partnership and not when the firm is finally dissolved or when one of the partners has retired. Therefore, on the dissolution of a firm, the stock-in-trade has to be valued with reference to the market value and not with reference to the book value in order to arrive at the true profit earned by the firm during the relevant previous year.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Income-Tax Officer vs Wilson Press Tools. on 11 May, 1989

In the present case, three of the four partners had retired and the fourth partner had taken over the assets and liabilities of the firm. Thus there was a clear case of dissolution of the assessee-firm and in these circumstances the decision of the Madras High Court would squarely apply to the assessees case and the ITO was justified in re-valuing the closing stock of finished goods as on 30-9-81 at market rate and bringing to assessment the difference between the book value and market value. Actually the above view of the Madras High Court had the tacit support of Supreme Court in Sunil Siddharthbhais case (supra) as was pointed out by the Kerala High Court in the case of Popular Workshops (supra). Hence, in the light of the decision of the Madras High Court referred to earlier, the other contentions raised by the assessees representative have to be rejected. The feeble attempt made by the assessees representative that the stock of finished goods as on 30-9-81 had already been valued at market rate and on that basis only adjustment of accounts between the partners took place is a new case made out for the first time before us and is not supported by the terms and conditions of the retirement deed dt. 30-9-81 or any other material and further there was no whisper of any such argument at any stage either before the ITO or before the Commissioner (A). Hence this argument is not entertained. In commissioner (A) and restore the order of the ITO bringing to assessment a sum of Rs. 24,088 by valuing the stock of finished goods as on 30-9-81 at market rate.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next