31 Oct 1990
COMMISSIONER OF INIAND REVENUE v. ASPIRATION LAND INVESTMENT LTD.
- Citation
- COMMISSIONER OF INIAND REVENUE v. ASPIRATION LAND INVESTMENT LTD.
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCIA10/1989
The summons to amend the case stated was dismissed as an abuse of process and on discretionary grounds: the Commissioner sought to reopen and relitigate the Board's factual findings by annexing transcripts and adducing 'the whole of the evidence' without identifying specific findings alleged to be unsupported; the Board's fact‑finding role is final unless particular findings are shown to have no evidential basis (Edwards v. Bairstow test), and the Board was entitled to refuse to frame the broad questions sought.