Conscious concealment of income is a factual finding; disputing evidence alone does not raise a referable question of law.

A Tribunal finding that an assessee had not consciously concealed income was treated as a question of fact, based on the material before it. The Revenue's challenge went only to the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence and sufficiency of the factual record, which did not by itself raise a question of law. On that basis, the High Court held that no referable legal issue arose under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and rejected the applications for reference.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law arose from the Tribunal's finding that there was no conscious concealment of income so as to warrant a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The Tribunal had recorded a factual finding, on the material before it, that the assessee had not consciously concealed income. The challenge raised by the Revenue was directed only against that factual appreciation. The determination whether conscious concealment existed was treated as a question of fact, and no legal issue arose merely because the Revenue disputed the sufficiency of the evidence relied upon by the Tribunal.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's order, and the applications for reference were rejected.

---