1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Special Leave Petition dismissed for 392-day delay and lack of merit after similar matter rejected</h1> The SC dismissed the Special Leave Petition on dual grounds of inordinate delay of 392 days in filing and on merits. The Court noted that a similar matter ... Disallowance of fictitious loss, Unexplained expenses on account of debit note, Addition u/s 68 - inordinate delay of 392 days in filing the Special Leave Petition. HELD THAT:- Though, a letter has been submitted seeking adjournment, learned Additional Solicitor General very fairly submits that similar matter has already been dismissed by this Court in M/S N.K. INDUSTRIES LTD. [2025 (5) TMI 2061 - SC ORDER] As there is an inordinate delay of 392 days in filing the Special Leave Petition. That being the position, we dismiss the special Leave Petition both on the ground of limitation as well as on merits. The Supreme Court, in a Partial Court Working Days Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Vinod Chandran, dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) primarily on two grounds: 'an inordinate delay of 392 days in filing the Special Leave Petition' and on merits. The Court noted that a similar matter had already been dismissed by this Court in SLP(C) D.No. 17588 of 2025 by order dated 09.05.2025. Consequently, the petition was dismissed 'both on the ground of limitation as well as on merits,' and all pending applications were disposed of.