https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779026 The SC condoned a 57-day delay in refiling and allowed the interlocutory application. Noting an incorrect ITAT passage and that the AO had not resumed proceedings for the assessment year as found by the HC, the Court held that concurrent findings meant no substantial question of law arose. On the merits, the SC declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 and refused further relief to the petitioner. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Sep 2025 11:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779026 The SC condoned a 57-day delay in refiling and allowed the interlocutory application. Noting an incorrect ITAT passage and that the AO had not resumed proceedings for the assessment year as found by the HC, the Court held that concurrent findings meant no substantial question of law arose. On the merits, the SC declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 and refused further relief to the petitioner. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779026