<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (10) TMI 863 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780067</link>
    <description>Interconnect service charges were in issue as to whether they constituted royalty receipts. The Court found the explanations for the 256-day delay in filing the special leave petitions unsatisfactory and insufficient in law, so condonation was refused. Following its order in M/s M.I. Limited, the special leave petitions were also dismissed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2025 08:08:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=859053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 863 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780067</link>
      <description>Interconnect service charges were in issue as to whether they constituted royalty receipts. The Court found the explanations for the 256-day delay in filing the special leave petitions unsatisfactory and insufficient in law, so condonation was refused. Following its order in M/s M.I. Limited, the special leave petitions were also dismissed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>