https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15840 The Tribunal's finding on the assessee's imprest accounts, supported by the pattern of re-depositing withdrawals, was treated as a factual conclusion based on the record. Since the Revenue failed to show that the directors had used the withdrawn amounts for another purpose or that the funds were unavailable for re-deposit, and the findings were neither perverse nor unreasonable, no referable question of law arose under section 256(2). The request for a mandamus directing a reference was rejected. en-us Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:50:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15840 The Tribunal's finding on the assessee's imprest accounts, supported by the pattern of re-depositing withdrawals, was treated as a factual conclusion based on the record. Since the Revenue failed to show that the directors had used the withdrawn amounts for another purpose or that the funds were unavailable for re-deposit, and the findings were neither perverse nor unreasonable, no referable question of law arose under section 256(2). The request for a mandamus directing a reference was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15840