https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88021 SC dismissed the SLP due to a 295-day delay in filing, which remained unexplained by the petitioners. The underlying tax matter concerned an assessment order under Section 144C, where the FAO's order was deemed time-barred two years after DRP directions. The HC previously ruled that the original return of income must be accepted, entitling the petitioner to a refund with applicable interest. The procedural requirement mandated completion within 30 days of the order's upload. The SLP was consequently rejected on procedural grounds of delay, without examining the substantive tax dispute. en-us Sat, 03 May 2025 08:34:49 +0530 Sat, 03 May 2025 08:34:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88021 SC dismissed the SLP due to a 295-day delay in filing, which remained unexplained by the petitioners. The underlying tax matter concerned an assessment order under Section 144C, where the FAO's order was deemed time-barred two years after DRP directions. The HC previously ruled that the original return of income must be accepted, entitling the petitioner to a refund with applicable interest. The procedural requirement mandated completion within 30 days of the order's upload. The SLP was consequently rejected on procedural grounds of delay, without examining the substantive tax dispute. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 03 May 2025 08:34:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88021