https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34379 The High Court held that the Tribunal's deletion of additions relating to unsecured loans, commission/discount, and connected disallowances raised no substantial question of law under Section 260A. The Tribunal had relied on confirmations, vouchers, commission and discount details, and the Revenue's failure to effectively rebut that evidence. As those findings were purely factual and were not shown to be perverse, the appeal did not justify interference. The deleted additions were therefore sustained in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 16:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34379 The High Court held that the Tribunal's deletion of additions relating to unsecured loans, commission/discount, and connected disallowances raised no substantial question of law under Section 260A. The Tribunal had relied on confirmations, vouchers, commission and discount details, and the Revenue's failure to effectively rebut that evidence. As those findings were purely factual and were not shown to be perverse, the appeal did not justify interference. The deleted additions were therefore sustained in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34379