https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49647 A finding of fact by income-tax authorities is not open to interference merely because another view is possible; interference lies only where the finding is unsupported by evidence or is perverse. Applying that standard, the Court accepted the Tribunal's conclusion that the forward contracts were made at Bombay and that the profits accrued there. Direct testimony and surrounding circumstances supported that finding, and the objections to parts of the evidence did not show any material misdirection or evidentiary gap. The Tribunal's finding was therefore upheld, and the profits remained taxable under the Act. en-us Wed, 21 May 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49647 A finding of fact by income-tax authorities is not open to interference merely because another view is possible; interference lies only where the finding is unsupported by evidence or is perverse. Applying that standard, the Court accepted the Tribunal's conclusion that the forward contracts were made at Bombay and that the profits accrued there. Direct testimony and surrounding circumstances supported that finding, and the objections to parts of the evidence did not show any material misdirection or evidentiary gap. The Tribunal's finding was therefore upheld, and the profits remained taxable under the Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 May 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49647