https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27746 The Bombay High Court accepted that the Tribunal's finding was supported by evidence that the assessee's solitary land purchase was an investment transaction, not an adventure in the nature of trade. The land had been acquired for staff quarters and related facilities, and the Tribunal relied on the absence of any pattern of repeated land dealings, together with the material showing the later sale occurred when business fortunes declined. On those facts, the Court held that the finding was neither perverse nor unsupported by evidence, so no reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was warranted. en-us Mon, 06 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:21:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27746 The Bombay High Court accepted that the Tribunal's finding was supported by evidence that the assessee's solitary land purchase was an investment transaction, not an adventure in the nature of trade. The land had been acquired for staff quarters and related facilities, and the Tribunal relied on the absence of any pattern of repeated land dealings, together with the material showing the later sale occurred when business fortunes declined. On those facts, the Court held that the finding was neither perverse nor unsupported by evidence, so no reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27746