https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756275 The restrictive part of the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, had already been struck down, and that position stood confirmed by the Supreme Court. On that basis, the Tribunal's extension of stay of demand beyond 365 days could not be faulted. In the connected matters, the appeals had also become infructuous because the relevant Tribunal proceedings had already been adjudicated. No substantial question of law arose on these facts. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jul 2024 18:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756275 The restrictive part of the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, had already been struck down, and that position stood confirmed by the Supreme Court. On that basis, the Tribunal's extension of stay of demand beyond 365 days could not be faulted. In the connected matters, the appeals had also become infructuous because the relevant Tribunal proceedings had already been adjudicated. No substantial question of law arose on these facts. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756275