The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai v. Hindustan Diamond Company Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5360 OF 2010 WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.6284 OF 2010WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.964 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 3, Mumbai Versus Hindustan Diamond Company Private Limited ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Mr.F.V. Irani with Mr.P.C. Tripathi i/by Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &A.R. Joshi, JJ. DATE : 16th November 2011 P.C. : 1.Income Tax Appeal No.964 of 2011 is not on board and the same is taken up by consent of both the parties. 2.The dispute in all these appeals is whether the valuation of closing stock of the rough diamonds has to be made at the lower of the cost or realizable value as contended by the assessee or as per weight average method adopted by the assessing officer. 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee is a joint sector undertaking in which the Government holds fifty per cent of the equity capital. The Tribunal has held that the method followed by the assessee is a method which has been consistently followed since inception and the said method has been upheld by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of assessee for AY 1989-1990. That decision has been accepted by the Revenue for several years. Moreover, no case is made out for taking a contrary view. 4.In these circumstances, in our opinion no fault found with the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in holding that the method of valuation of the closing stock of rough diamonds adopted by the assessee is just and proper. Accordingly, all the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.R. Joshi, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)