Tribunal findings on accounting method and the proviso to section 13 are factual when supported by relevant material.

Where the Tribunal's view that the proviso to section 13 applied is supported by relevant material, the issue remains one of fact and does not give rise to a referable question of law. The Tribunal may rely on circumstances such as the wholesale nature of the business, absence of quantity tally for major items, lack of a stock register, and the presence of imported goods with high profit margins to conclude that income, profits and gains could not properly be deduced from the accounting method adopted. Judicial interference is confined to cases where no supporting material exists.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's finding that the proviso to section 13 applied to the assessee's trading results was supported by material and therefore did not give rise to a referable question of law.

Analysis: The assessee's challenge rested on the absence of a stock register and the lower profit margin. The Tribunal, however, relied on relevant circumstances, including the wholesale nature of the business, the absence of quantity tally for major items, and the availability of imported goods carrying a high margin of profit. The only real enquiry was whether there was any material supporting the Tribunal's conclusion that the income, profits and gains could not properly be deduced from the method of accounting adopted. That enquiry did not depend on reappreciation of the correctness of the conclusion, but only on the existence of supporting material.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's finding was supported by material and no question of law arose requiring a reference.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected, and the Revenue's position was sustained on the limited question of reference and the applicability of the proviso to section 13.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Tribunal's conclusion on the applicability of the proviso to section 13 is supported by relevant material, the issue is one of fact and not a referable question of law; judicial interference is confined to cases where no material supports the finding.

---