Q.A consignor sent 1,000 kg of a chemical, costing ₹18 per kg, to a consignee, and paid ₹1,000 as freight. On the journey, 50 kg of the chemical evaporated — a loss regarded as normal and inherent to the nature of the goods. The consignee sold 800 kg during the year. Compute the cost per kg of the stock remaining, and the value of the unsold stock of 150 kg.

The evaporated 50 kg is a normal loss and is never separately valued — instead, the same total cost is spread over the smaller quantity of 950 kg that actually survived.

Total cost = (1,000 × 18) + 1,000 = 19,000; effective quantity after normal loss = 1,000 − 50 = 950 kg; cost per kg = 19,000 ÷ 950 = 20; unsold = 950 − 800 = 150 kg; value = 150 × 20 = 3,000.

Total cost of the chemical sent = 1,000 kg × ₹18 = ₹18,000; adding the freight of ₹1,000 gives a total cost (before allowing for the loss) of ₹19,000.

The 50 kg lost through evaporation in transit is a NORMAL loss — it is a natural, unavoidable characteristic of transporting this kind of chemical, not an accident, so it is never separately valued or shown as a loss figure anywhere. Instead, the SAME total cost of ₹19,000 must now be spread over the smaller quantity that actually survived the journey: 1,000 − 50 = 950 kg.

Cost per kg of the surviving stock = 19,000 ÷ 950 = ₹20.

Of the 950 kg that survived, 800 kg were sold, leaving 950 − 800 = 150 kg unsold.

Value of the 150 kg unsold stock = 150 × 20 = ₹3,000.

Check: value of the 800 kg sold, at the same rate = 800 × 20 = 16,000; adding the unsold stock (16,000 + 3,000 = 19,000) exactly reproduces the total cost of 19,000 — the cost of the normal loss has been silently absorbed into the higher per-kg rate charged on the surviving 950 kg, with nothing left over and nothing double-counted.

A frequent error is dividing the total cost by the ORIGINAL quantity sent (1,000 kg) instead of the quantity that actually survived (950 kg) — a normal loss must always reduce the DIVISOR used to find the cost per unit, never be valued as a separate loss figure.