Genuineness of a firm as a factual finding limited the scope for interference, sustaining refusal of registration.

Concurrent findings that no genuine firm had come into existence were treated as findings of fact, and that issue was not pursued before the Tribunal. The High Court held that the genuineness of the firm was not open to reconsideration in reference proceedings, given the limited scope of interference with factual findings on firm genuineness. On that basis, the Tribunal's view upholding refusal of registration was sustained and the question was answered in favour of the revenue, against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding refusal of registration to the assessee-firm.

Analysis: The authorities below had concurrently found that no genuine firm had come into existence. The challenge to that factual finding had not been pursued before the Tribunal, and the question whether the firm was genuine was one of fact not open to reconsideration in the reference. In view of the Supreme Court authority on the limited scope of interference with findings on genuineness of a firm, the earlier contrary view of the High Court was not required to be examined.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the affirmative, upholding refusal of registration and holding against the assessee.

---