https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784553 The dominant issue was whether the delay of 154 days in filing the SLP should be condoned so as to permit examination of additions under ss. 68 and 69C relating to alleged penny-stock transactions. The SC held that the petitioner failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay, and therefore did not establish sufficient cause for condonation. Consequently, the SLP was dismissed as time-barred, leaving the HC's decision (which had accepted the assessee's documentary evidence for the share transactions) undisturbed. en-us Mon, 05 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:03:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784553 The dominant issue was whether the delay of 154 days in filing the SLP should be condoned so as to permit examination of additions under ss. 68 and 69C relating to alleged penny-stock transactions. The SC held that the petitioner failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay, and therefore did not establish sufficient cause for condonation. Consequently, the SLP was dismissed as time-barred, leaving the HC's decision (which had accepted the assessee's documentary evidence for the share transactions) undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784553