https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152706 A reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act lies only where a genuine question of law arises. Questions based on appreciation of evidence and concurrent factual findings on unexplained investment in ornaments, house construction, and unexplained credit were not referable, because they sought only reappreciation of facts. The issue relating to an addition remanded for fresh examination also did not raise a question of law, since remand leaves the matter open before the Assessing Officer. A question on alleged undeclared payment for immovable property failed because it rested on inference, not incriminating search material, and the credit issue fell outside undisclosed income under Chapter XIV-B as it appeared in the regular books. en-us Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 21:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152706 A reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act lies only where a genuine question of law arises. Questions based on appreciation of evidence and concurrent factual findings on unexplained investment in ornaments, house construction, and unexplained credit were not referable, because they sought only reappreciation of facts. The issue relating to an addition remanded for fresh examination also did not raise a question of law, since remand leaves the matter open before the Assessing Officer. A question on alleged undeclared payment for immovable property failed because it rested on inference, not incriminating search material, and the credit issue fell outside undisclosed income under Chapter XIV-B as it appeared in the regular books. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152706