(S) During the assessment proceedings for the year 1985-86 in relation to assessee's assessment case, who was working as a liquor contractor, the question arose, as to whether certain loans taken by thein from some persons are genuine or not. The A.O. held that they were not genuine loans and accordingly disbelieving the entries made in the account books in respect of such loans added the said amount in the total income of the assessee as their incorae. The assessee filed appeal to CIT (Appeal) who by his order partly allowed the appeal and while setting aside of the order of the assessment passed by assessing officer, held that some loans are genuine, whereas, some are not after examining on facts each transaction. Both Revenue and assessee then filed their respective appeals to the Tribunals against the order of the CIT (appeals). The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, whereas, it partly allowed the assessee's appeal and it was held that some ruore loans which were not held genuine by CIT (Appeal) are also found to be ;enuine. To that extent the orders of CDT (Appeal) was modified. It is against this order, the Revenue felt aggrieved and sought reference to this Court under Section 256 (1), but the Tribunal by the impugned order, disruissed the application and declined to make the reference. It was held that the question as to whether a particular loan taken by assessee is genuine or not is a pure question of fact and when two appellate authorities have held on appreciation of evidence adduced by the assessee
