Judgment :- JAYASIMHA BABU, J. The question that has been referred to us at the instance of the Revenue in respect of the respondent M/s Parry & Co. Ltd.'s assessment for the asst. yr. 1971-72, is as to whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the cost of shares sold have to be taken on the basis of cost of acquisition and that the method of averaging the cost of acquisition of shares should not be followed even though bonus shares were allotted subsequently ? 2. The dispute between the parties centres round the capital gain or loss arising from the sale of ordinary shares in Parrys Confectionery Ltd. The assessee sold 1, 86, 750 shares. Out of that 1, 21, 490 shares had been purchased by the assessee for cash at Rs. 2 per shares on 9th August, 1958. The balance of 65, 230 shares had been purchased on 31st July, 1967 at the same price. At the time of sale the assessee held a total of 10, 28, 889 shares in the company. It had received bonus shares on 28th July, 1960, 8th September, 1960, 17th August, 1962 and 23rd September, 1966. The ITO averaged the cost of acquisition on the entire holding of 10, 28, 889 shares and arrived at the average cost. The Tribunal did not agree with that manner of computing the original cost of acquisition, and held that the shares purchased by the assessee on 9th August, 1958 cannot be averaged by taking note of the subsequent issue of bonus shares. Similarly, the shares purchased on 31st July, 1961 also, in the view of the Tribunal, could not be valued at the average cost by taking into account the bonus shares issued subsequently. 3. The view of the Tribunal is plainly untenable in the light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd. vs. CIT. 3. The view of the Tribunal is plainly untenable in the light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd. vs. CIT. The apex Court held that where the shares had been admittedly purchased after 1954, and, therefore, the option of taking the fair market value as on 1st January, 1954 was not available to the assessee, and bonus shares were issued after such purchase to the assessee, the cost of acquisition of the original shares was required to be averaged by taking into account the bonus shares received by the assessee for the purpose of computing the capital gains. 4. The ITO had rightly adopted the principle of averaging the cost of acquisition of shares having regard to the extent of the investment made by the assessee in acquiring those shares cost to the assessee in this case was the cost incurred by it at the time of the purchase of the original shares. The purchase of those shares not only enabled the assessee to claim ownership of the shares purchased, but it also enabled the assessee to receive further shares at a subsequent point of time as bonus shares without any further investment having to be made. The cost of acquisition of the original shares, therefore, stood reduced by reason of the subsequent receipt of bonus shares without any additional investment. When the original shares were sold by the assessee, the cost of acquisition of those shares had necessarily to be determined by taking into account the bonus shares held by the assessee for acquiring which it had made no further investment. 5. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The Revenue is entitled to cost of Rs. 500.