Substantial question of law requirement bars reassessment of concurrent findings on developer eligibility for infrastructure deduction.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 260-A permits a High Court appeal only where a substantial question of law arises; it does not allow reappreciation of evidence or replacement of concurrent factual findings. Concurrent findings that road and infrastructure works qualified the assessee as a developer eligible for deduction under section 80-IA(4) were based on the record, with no perversity or erroneous legal test shown. Reliance on a previously confirmed Tribunal order and dismissal of a similar appeal for another assessment year did not create a substantial question of law. The Department's appeal was dismissed.....