https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11627 Under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, the High Court can interfere only on a substantial question of law, not with Tribunal findings based on appreciation of evidence. The Tribunal's conclusion that the assessee had not maintained quantitative details of sarees, that the alleged purchases were not verifiable and could be treated as bogus, and that rejection of accounts justified a best judgment assessment were all factual determinations. Once accounts are rejected, best judgment assessment is permissible and involves an element of guesswork. Those factual findings were therefore not open to interference under section 260A, and the appeal failed. en-us Mon, 25 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11627 Under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, the High Court can interfere only on a substantial question of law, not with Tribunal findings based on appreciation of evidence. The Tribunal's conclusion that the assessee had not maintained quantitative details of sarees, that the alleged purchases were not verifiable and could be treated as bogus, and that rejection of accounts justified a best judgment assessment were all factual determinations. Once accounts are rejected, best judgment assessment is permissible and involves an element of guesswork. Those factual findings were therefore not open to interference under section 260A, and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 25 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11627