https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771247 The dominant issue was whether the SC should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 to interfere with the impugned decision. The Court held that no grounds were made out warranting interference in special leave jurisdiction, indicating an absence of any manifest legal error or miscarriage of justice justifying intervention. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and any pending application stood disposed of. en-us Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771247 The dominant issue was whether the SC should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 to interfere with the impugned decision. The Court held that no grounds were made out warranting interference in special leave jurisdiction, indicating an absence of any manifest legal error or miscarriage of justice justifying intervention. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and any pending application stood disposed of. Case-Laws GST Fri, 16 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771247