https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333041 The Supreme Court rejected review petitions against its 22 April 2016 judgment after finding no arguable error, omission or other sufficient ground to reopen the earlier decision, and the petitions were dismissed for want of a case for review. The Court also refused the request for oral hearing, indicating that the review applications could be decided on the papers without oral submissions. The operative effect was that the earlier judgment remained undisturbed and the review process came to an end. en-us Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333041 The Supreme Court rejected review petitions against its 22 April 2016 judgment after finding no arguable error, omission or other sufficient ground to reopen the earlier decision, and the petitions were dismissed for want of a case for review. The Court also refused the request for oral hearing, indicating that the review applications could be decided on the papers without oral submissions. The operative effect was that the earlier judgment remained undisturbed and the review process came to an end. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333041