https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291073 The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the single judge. The court allowed the condonation of a 35-day delay in filing the appeal. It stated that challenges to reassessment proceedings should be addressed through statutory authorities and not through a writ petition. The High Court emphasized that fact-finding matters are better suited for competent authorities, and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 is not appropriate for finalizing such issues. The appellant was directed to address concerns of potential double taxation before the competent authority. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291073 The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the single judge. The court allowed the condonation of a 35-day delay in filing the appeal. It stated that challenges to reassessment proceedings should be addressed through statutory authorities and not through a writ petition. The High Court emphasized that fact-finding matters are better suited for competent authorities, and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 is not appropriate for finalizing such issues. The appellant was directed to address concerns of potential double taxation before the competent authority. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291073