Substantial question of law test defeated where revenue challenge was only to factual findings and no legal infirmity was shown.

A tax appeal will not succeed where the grievance is directed only against factual findings and no substantial question of law is shown. The High Court noted that the Tribunal record did not show the departmental objections had been raised below, and it was not established that the Tribunal had ignored any condition of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. or relied on comparator decisions involving the same notification regime. As the challenge merely sought reappreciation of facts, it could not be converted into a question of law, and the court would not sit as a fact-finding forum. No legal infirmity was found, so interference was declined and the Tribunal's order was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether any substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order so as to warrant interference in the revenue's appeal.

Analysis: The Tribunal's order did not disclose that the departmental representative had raised the present objections before it, and the record did not establish that the Tribunal had ignored any condition of Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. or that the differing Tribunal decisions relied upon by it had been shown to involve the same notification regime. The challenge raised by the revenue was in substance directed against factual findings. Such grievances could not be converted into a question of law in tax appeal, and the High Court could not assume the role of a fact-finding forum. In the absence of any legal infirmity in the Tribunal's order, no interference was justified.

Conclusion: No substantial question of law arose. The revenue's appeal was not entertained and the Tribunal's order remained undisturbed.

---