https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795845 Concurrent factual findings on the attribution of a seized document cannot be disturbed in an appeal under Section 260A unless shown to be perverse. Where the original seized document was unavailable and the appellate authorities found that the scanned entry referred to another entity rather than the assessee, the challenge raised only a factual dispute. The High Court found no perversity in that concurrent finding and therefore declined interference, deciding the issue in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jul 2026 08:30:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795845 Concurrent factual findings on the attribution of a seized document cannot be disturbed in an appeal under Section 260A unless shown to be perverse. Where the original seized document was unavailable and the appellate authorities found that the scanned entry referred to another entity rather than the assessee, the challenge raised only a factual dispute. The High Court found no perversity in that concurrent finding and therefore declined interference, deciding the issue in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795845