Mixed questions of law and fact are reviewable when findings rest on no evidence, perversity, or irrelevant considerations.

A finding that an assessee was a dealer in investments and properties, and that gains from sale of shares, securities and immovable property were business profits, can raise questions of law where the Tribunal has treated the issue as concluded by isolated factors rather than the totality of relevant facts. A mixed question of law and fact is reviewable if it is unsupported by evidence, perverse, or based on irrelevant considerations or ignored material. The legal character of transactions must be determined from the whole record, not merely from the memorandum of association or earlier assertions. The Court therefore held that questions of law arose and remitted the matter for a stated case.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's conclusion that the assessee was a dealer in investments and properties, and that the profits on sale of shares, securities and immovable properties were business profits, gave rise to questions of law fit for reference under the Income-tax Act.

Analysis: The Court distinguished questions of pure fact from mixed questions of law and fact. A finding of fact is not open to interference merely because another view is possible, but it becomes vulnerable where it is unsupported by evidence, is perverse, or is reached by taking irrelevant matters into account or ignoring relevant materials. The character of an assessee as a dealer or an investor is not determined merely by the memorandum of association or by earlier assertions; those matters may be relevant, but only in the setting of the whole record. Applying that principle, the Court held that the Tribunal had treated the issue as concluded by the company's objects and its past position, whereas the legal effect of the proved facts still required determination.

Conclusion: Questions of law did arise out of the Tribunal's order, including whether there was material to support the finding that the assessee was a dealer and whether the resulting gains were taxable as business profits.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, and the matter was sent back so that the Tribunal could state a case on the identified questions of law.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding on a mixed question of law and fact is open to judicial review if it is based on no evidence, is perverse, or rests on irrelevant considerations; the legal character of transactions must be determined from the totality of relevant facts, not from isolated factors alone.

---