Substantial questions of law in tax appeals are admitted only when they truly arise on the record and were properly preserved.

Substantial questions of law under section 260A were admitted where the issues were identical to those raised in earlier appeals concerning the same assessee and the Tribunal had followed its own earlier view. Questions already declined in prior appeals, questions not raised earlier without any change in law or facts, and a question not urged before the Tribunal were not entertained. The operative principle stated is that admission depends on a substantial question of law arising on the record; matters already rejected on the same facts, or not preserved before the Tribunal, do not qualify for admission.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether questions (i), (v), (vi), (viii) and (x) disclosed substantial questions of law so as to warrant admission of the appeals; (ii) Whether questions (ii), (iii), (iv), (vii), (ix), (xi) and (xii) disclosed substantial questions of law so as to warrant admission of the appeals.

Issue (i): Whether questions (i), (v), (vi), (viii) and (x) disclosed substantial questions of law so as to warrant admission of the appeals.

Analysis: The issues raised in these questions were stated to be identical to those urged in earlier appeals involving the same assessee for earlier assessment years, and the Tribunal's order under challenge had followed its own earlier view on the same questions. In that setting, the appeals were held to raise substantial questions of law.

Conclusion: These questions were admitted.

Issue (ii): Whether questions (ii), (iii), (iv), (vii), (ix), (xi) and (xii) disclosed substantial questions of law so as to warrant admission of the appeals.

Analysis: Questions (ii), (ix) and (xi) had already been declined admission in earlier appeals on the same issues, and no distinguishing factual or legal feature was shown to justify a different view. Questions (iii), (iv) and (vii) were also not entertained because the Revenue had not raised them in the earlier appeals for prior assessment years and no change in law or facts was shown. Question (xii) was not entertained because it had not been urged before the Tribunal and therefore did not give rise to a substantial question of law.

Conclusion: These questions were not entertained.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were admitted only on the specified substantial questions of law and were otherwise declined at the stage of admission.

Ratio Decidendi: A question of law will be admitted in appeal under section 260A only if it is shown to arise substantially on the record, and a question not raised before the Tribunal or already declined on the same facts without any change in law or circumstances will not be entertained.

---