https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61152 Deductibility of disputed payments as business expenditure was treated as turning on factual questions, including whether there was any infraction of law, dishonest or fraudulent breach of contract, or a penalty character in the payments, and whether the outgoings were intimately connected with the business and incidental to it. Those matters were held to be pure questions of fact, not referable questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The cited Supreme Court decisions were regarded as having settled the governing legal position on the kind of deduction claimed, so no further reference was necessary and the request to draw up a statement of the case was declined. en-us Fri, 23 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jan 2011 11:21:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61152 Deductibility of disputed payments as business expenditure was treated as turning on factual questions, including whether there was any infraction of law, dishonest or fraudulent breach of contract, or a penalty character in the payments, and whether the outgoings were intimately connected with the business and incidental to it. Those matters were held to be pure questions of fact, not referable questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The cited Supreme Court decisions were regarded as having settled the governing legal position on the kind of deduction claimed, so no further reference was necessary and the request to draw up a statement of the case was declined. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61152