https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40326 In a reference under the Estate Duty Act, the High Court could not reappreciate evidence and disturb the Tribunal's finding that the gift settlements were genuine, possession had passed to the transferees, and the deceased retained no benefit or enjoyment. The Tribunal was the final fact-finding authority, and interference with its factual conclusion was permissible only if the referred question specifically raised perversity, meaning a conclusion no reasonable person could reach on the material. As no such perversity question was proposed, the High Court's factual reassessment was impermissible and the reference had to be answered in favour of the appellant. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jun 2014 21:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40326 In a reference under the Estate Duty Act, the High Court could not reappreciate evidence and disturb the Tribunal's finding that the gift settlements were genuine, possession had passed to the transferees, and the deceased retained no benefit or enjoyment. The Tribunal was the final fact-finding authority, and interference with its factual conclusion was permissible only if the referred question specifically raised perversity, meaning a conclusion no reasonable person could reach on the material. As no such perversity question was proposed, the High Court's factual reassessment was impermissible and the reference had to be answered in favour of the appellant. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40326