https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220746 Concurrent factual findings in an income-tax appeal were treated as insufficient to raise a substantial question of law under section 260A. The court found that the assessee had not proved payment through account payee cheques for the purchase transaction, that the claimed advance for a petrol pump purchase was unsupported by the books and reliable evidence, and that interest paid to a related person exceeded the market rate without proof of genuineness or bona fides. On those factual bases, the additions under sections 40A(3) and 40A(2)(b) were maintained and no interference was warranted. en-us Mon, 28 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Feb 2013 06:41:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220746 Concurrent factual findings in an income-tax appeal were treated as insufficient to raise a substantial question of law under section 260A. The court found that the assessee had not proved payment through account payee cheques for the purchase transaction, that the claimed advance for a petrol pump purchase was unsupported by the books and reliable evidence, and that interest paid to a related person exceeded the market rate without proof of genuineness or bona fides. On those factual bases, the additions under sections 40A(3) and 40A(2)(b) were maintained and no interference was warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220746