Suhas Chandra Sen, J. - (1.) In this case, at the instance of the Revenue, the following questions of law have been referred by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, to this court: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to change the method of valuation of its closing stock and in that view allowing the deduction of Rs. 2,06,452 claimed by the assessee ?
(2.) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the cash payments on account of reimbursement of medical expenses of the employees could not be included in the value of benefit, amenity or perquisite for the purpose of disallowance in excess of the limits laid down under Section 40(c)(iii) or Section 40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" 2. So far as the second question is concerned, the point is concluded by the judgment of this court in the case of Indian Leaf Tobacco Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT. Following that decision the second question is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.
(3.) So far as the first question is concerned, the facts are briefly as under: The assessee is a scheduled bank incorporated in the United Kingdom which has its branches in India. The reference relates to the assessment year 1968-69. For this assessment year the assessee claimed before the ITO that it should be allowed to change its method of valuation of closing stock from market value to the lower of the market value or cost and on this basis the assessable profit from dealings in shares and securities should be reduced by Rs. 2,06,452. The ITO, however, did not accept this contention.;