https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2091 SC dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court order, finding no substantial question of law. Disputes over the actual sale price, the correctness of claimed consultancy fees versus the AO's adjustment, contradictory statements by a party, and reliance on loose sheets from a raid were treated as questions of fact. The Court noted that borrowing language from subordinate orders is not per se impermissible but should acknowledge sources, and concluded there was no infirmity in the HC's decision. en-us Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Apr 2026 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2091 SC dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court order, finding no substantial question of law. Disputes over the actual sale price, the correctness of claimed consultancy fees versus the AO's adjustment, contradictory statements by a party, and reliance on loose sheets from a raid were treated as questions of fact. The Court noted that borrowing language from subordinate orders is not per se impermissible but should acknowledge sources, and concluded there was no infirmity in the HC's decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2091