Inference from primary facts remains a question of fact unless unsupported by evidence or perverse

A finding that a dealer was not dealing in pure silk sarees was treated as an inference from primary facts, not a question of law. The court held that comparison of the disputed sarees with pure silk samples, physical verification, admitted facts, and market price comparison provided sufficient material for the Tribunal's conclusion. A factual finding can be interfered with only if there is no evidence or if it is perverse; mere disagreement between authorities does not convert it into a legal issue. The reference therefore did not disclose a question of law, and the revisional challenge failed, leaving the Tribunal's view undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's finding that the dealer was not dealing in pure silk sarees was a pure finding of fact and therefore not referable as a question of law, and whether the assessment/revisional challenge could succeed on the ground of perversity or absence of evidence.

Analysis: A finding based on admitted facts, physical verification, market price comparison, and comparison of the disputed saree with a pure silk saree was treated as an inference from facts. Such an inference does not become a question of law merely because different authorities reached different conclusions. A finding of fact can be interfered with only where there is no evidence to support it or where it is perverse. The materials relied upon by the Tribunal were held to be sufficient for its conclusion, and the use of inspection and comparison did not show excess of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The issue was held to be one of fact and not a mixed question of law and fact. The Revenue's challenge failed, and the assessee's position was accepted.

Final Conclusion: The reference did not disclose a question of law, and the revisional challenge was rejected, leaving the Tribunal's view undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: An inference drawn from primary facts is a question of fact, and it becomes open to interference only when it is unsupported by evidence or is perverse.

---