Peak credit theory and undisclosed income findings: one issue treated as fact, another held to raise a referable question of law.

The High Court treated the Tribunal's finding that Rs. 59,000 represented income from undisclosed sources as a finding of fact based on material on record, so no question of law arose on that issue. By contrast, the Tribunal's refusal to apply the peak credit theory was held to raise a question of law fit for reference under the reference jurisdiction, and the Tribunal was directed to refer that question. The application therefore succeeded only in part: one proposed question was rejected as factual, while the other was accepted for opinion.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Tribunal's finding that the amount of Rs. 59,000 represented income from undisclosed sources gave rise to a question of law. (ii) Whether a question of law arose on the Tribunal's refusal to grant the benefit of peak credit theory.

Issue (i): The finding that the amount represented income from undisclosed sources was based on material on record and was treated as a finding of fact.

Conclusion: No question of law arose on this issue.

Issue (ii): The refusal to apply peak credit theory was held to raise a question of law fit for reference under the reference jurisdiction.

Conclusion: A question of law did arise on this issue, and the Tribunal was directed to refer it.

Final Conclusion: The application for reference succeeded only in part, with one question rejected as factual and the other directed to be referred for opinion.

---