https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200718 Evidence of control, execution of books and contracts, insurance and overdraft arrangements, transfer of advances, and seized correspondence supported the Tribunal's finding that the business carried on in the name of U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu was in substance that of Ramaswami Naidu. That finding was treated as one of fact and was not open to interference in reference proceedings absent proof that it was unsupported by evidence or perverse. Once the business income was attributed to Ramaswami Naidu, the protective assessment on Krishnaswami Naidu could not stand, and its cancellation was justified. en-us Tue, 18 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Apr 2018 12:36:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200718 Evidence of control, execution of books and contracts, insurance and overdraft arrangements, transfer of advances, and seized correspondence supported the Tribunal's finding that the business carried on in the name of U. G. Krishnaswami Naidu was in substance that of Ramaswami Naidu. That finding was treated as one of fact and was not open to interference in reference proceedings absent proof that it was unsupported by evidence or perverse. Once the business income was attributed to Ramaswami Naidu, the protective assessment on Krishnaswami Naidu could not stand, and its cancellation was justified. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200718