Factual appreciation in contract revenue provision dispute led to refusal to admit a substantial question of law

The Calcutta HC treated the dispute over provision for foreseeable loss in contract revenue as a factual question, not a substantial question of law. It noted that the Tribunal had relied on the factual findings of the first appellate authority and accepted the assessee's claim for provision on the basis of scientific estimation supported by the record. Because the matter depended on the project works, accounting treatment, and factual appreciation already made below, the Court found no legal issue warranting admission. Substantial question of law no. 8 was therefore not admitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the issue relating to the provision for foreseeable loss in contract revenue raised a substantial question of law, so as to warrant admission of the appeal on that point.

Analysis: The Court noted that the Tribunal had examined the factual findings recorded by the first appellate authority and had treated the assessee's claim for provision on the basis of scientific estimation as supported by the material on record. The Court further observed that the issue turned on the factual matrix of the project works, the accounting treatment adopted, and the factual appreciation already made below. On that basis, the Court regarded the question as one of fact rather than one giving rise to a substantial question of law.

Conclusion: The issue was held to be fully factual and substantial question of law no. 8 was not admitted.

---