https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460738 No substantial question of law arose in the revenue's Section 260A appeal because the first appellate authority and the Tribunal had deleted the Section 68 additions on a detailed factual appreciation of the record and the assessee's explanation. The High Court found no legal error in that evaluation and held that interference is not warranted where the dispute is confined to facts. The revenue's challenge therefore failed. en-us Wed, 01 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:08:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460738 No substantial question of law arose in the revenue's Section 260A appeal because the first appellate authority and the Tribunal had deleted the Section 68 additions on a detailed factual appreciation of the record and the assessee's explanation. The High Court found no legal error in that evaluation and held that interference is not warranted where the dispute is confined to facts. The revenue's challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 01 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460738