<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (9) TMI 6 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6062</link>
    <description>A finding that a disputed income-tax addition was made on pure guesswork was treated as a finding of fact, and that factual conclusion could not be reopened as a question of law for a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On that basis, the High Court was not justified in directing a reference or in remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for re-examination of the same issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 6 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6062</link>
      <description>A finding that a disputed income-tax addition was made on pure guesswork was treated as a finding of fact, and that factual conclusion could not be reopened as a question of law for a reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On that basis, the High Court was not justified in directing a reference or in remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for re-examination of the same issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>