Substantial Questions of Law in section 260A cannot be raised for the first time on appeal where the challenge is factual

In an appeal under section 260A, questions not raised before the Assessing Officer or the Tribunal could not be introduced for the first time as substantial questions of law. The Court treated the proposed grounds as factual in nature, especially where the assessee had not complied with notices or filed a return, and found no basis to interfere with the assessment. The best judgment assessment was upheld because it was supported by material on record and no legal infirmity was shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could succeed on questions not raised before the Assessing Officer or the Tribunal, and whether the best judgment assessment was vitiated for want of material or legal error.

Analysis: The appeal was confined to substantial questions of law under section 260A. The grounds sought to be urged before the Court had not been taken before the Assessing Officer or the Tribunal, and the assessee had also failed to comply with notices or to file a return. In these circumstances, the Court held that the proposed questions were essentially factual, could not be raised for the first time in the appeal, and did not justify interference with the assessment. The best judgment assessment was supported by the material on record and was not shown to suffer from any legal infirmity.

Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment failed, and the appeal was not maintainable on the new factual issues sought to be raised; the decision was against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

---