https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29108 Rejection of account books and related trading additions were treated as findings based on appreciation of evidence, so no referable question of law arose merely because the accounts may have been rejected under one limb of section 145 rather than another. By contrast, disallowance of messing expenses raised a question of law because the Tribunal upheld it on the basis that the nature of the expenditure could not be ascertained from the available details and evidence, leaving the deductibility issue unresolved on the legal character of the claim. A reference was therefore directed only on the messing-expenses issue. en-us Fri, 20 Aug 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:14:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29108 Rejection of account books and related trading additions were treated as findings based on appreciation of evidence, so no referable question of law arose merely because the accounts may have been rejected under one limb of section 145 rather than another. By contrast, disallowance of messing expenses raised a question of law because the Tribunal upheld it on the basis that the nature of the expenditure could not be ascertained from the available details and evidence, leaving the deductibility issue unresolved on the legal character of the claim. A reference was therefore directed only on the messing-expenses issue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Aug 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29108