SLP

MANUAL
First Edition: 2025

(FOR DEPARTMENTAL USE ONLY)

DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (LEGAL & RESEARCH)

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
North Block, New Delhi - 110001
Email: [email protected]

It is with great pleasure that I present the Special Leave Petition (SLP) Manual, a
comprehensive guide designed to streamline and enhance the handling of SLP
proposals within the department. This manual has been meticulously compiled,
providing a detailed and structured discussion on the processes involved in filing
SLPs.

This manual is unique in its approach since it integrates valuable insights from the
Directorate of L&R as well as the Central Agency Section of Ministry of Law &
Justice on managing SLP proposals. It incorporates best practices, highlights
common pitfalls to avoid, and serves as a practical guide for officers/officials of
the department.

I extend my heartfelt appreciation to Sh. Ajay Goyal, the DGIT (L&R) and his
dedicated team for their exemplary efforts in developing this manual. Their
commitment to excellence is evident in the quality and utility of this guide.

I am confident that the SLP Manual will prove to be a valuable resource to navigate
the complexities of handling SLP proposals efficiently, thereby minimizing delays
and enhancing the overall effectiveness of our processes.

Sh. Sanjay Kumar, IRS

Member (A&J), CBDT
 Office of the Director General
of Income Tax (Legal & Research)
Room No. 401, Drum Shaped Building,
I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110002
Email: [email protected]

The filing and handling of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) within the department is a
complex and unique process involving different authorities and seamless coordination
with the Ministry of Law and Justice. The procedural intricacies often lead to challenges,
including delays, inconsistencies, and a lack of clarity regarding the roles and
responsibilities of the various authorities involved. These challenges prompted the need
to compile the Special Leave Petition (SLP) Manual, designed to provide a clear and
structured framework for the filing and handling of SLPs within the department.

The manual divides the 90-day timeline for filing an SLP into six distinct phases, clearly
outlining the roles and responsibilities of the authorities involved. Incorporating insights
from the Directorate and the Central Agency Section of the Ministry of Law & Justice, it
emphasizes common errors to avoid and best practices to improve efficiency. It also
consolidates relevant circulars, instructions, and procedural guidelines making the
manual a comprehensive, one-stop reference for managing SLP matters.

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to Shri Sanjay Kumar, Member (A&J), CBDT,
whose invaluable guidance and unwavering support have been instrumental in bringing
this manual to fruition. The editorial board of the manual and the team at the Directorate
of Legal & Research deserve praise for their diligence and commitment to maintaining the
highest standards in the compilation of this manual.

I hope this SLP Manual will prove to be a key resource for the department.

Sh. Ajay Goyal, IRS

DGIT (L&R)
 EDITORIAL BOARD

Sh. Ajay Goyal

DGIT(L&R)
_________________

Sh. Sanjay Gupta Sh. Paresh Johri Ms. Shweta Mishra

Pr. ADG(L&R)-2 Pr. ADG(L&R)-1 CIT(OSD)(L&R)

_________________

Ms. Chajat Lowang

DDIT (L&R)
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
PHASE-1 FIELD AUTHORITIES
NO.
1. SLP PROCESSING 1.1. Process Post Pronouncement 03-05
AT THE END OF FIELD of Order of the High Court
AUTHORITIES 1.2. Application for obtaining 05-07
Certified Copy of Order
1.3. Computation of limitation 07-08
period w.r.t. Certified Copy and
filing of an SLP
1.4. Insights from the Directorate 08-10
1.5. Proposing SLP on E-Office 09-10
1.6. Creation of E-office file by Pr. 10-22
CIT
1.7. Insights from the Directorate 22-25
PHASE-2 DIRECTORATE OF INCOME
TAX (LEGAL & RESEARCH)
2. PROCESSING OF 2.1. Organisational Setup of the 26-27
SLP IN THE Directorate
DIRECTORATE OF 2.2. Timeline to be Observed by 28
LEGAL & RESEARCH the Directorate for SLP Processing
2.3. Stages of Processing of a SLP 29-31
Proposal in the Directorate
2.4. Key Aspects taken into 31-32
Consideration during Formulation
of Opinion in the Directorate
2.5. Insights from the Directorate 32-34
PHASE-3 MINISTRY OF LAW &
JUSTICE
3. PROCESSING OF 3.1. Processing of the SLP 35-37
SLP IN MOL&J Proposal after approval by Member
(A&J)
PHASE-4 DIRECTORATE OF INCOME
TAX (LEGAL & RESEARCH)
and FIELD AUTHORITIES
4. VETTING OF DRAFT 4.1. Process of vetting of draft SLP 38-39
SLP PETITION 4.2. Insights from the directorate 39-40
PHASE-5 CENTRAL AGENCY SECTION
MoL&J

iv
5. FILING AND LISTING 5.1. Process of filing and listing 41-42
OF SLP of SLP
5.2. Insights from the Directorate 43-48
5.3. Engagement of Counsels 48-49
5.4. Efforts undertaken by the 49-50
Directorate of Income Tax (Legal &
Research)
PHASE-6 REVENUE SECRETARY
NOTE
6. SLP PROCESSING 6.1. Communication of ASG 51
WHERE FIELD Opinion to the field
DISAGREES WITH 6.2. Comments of field on the 52
OPINION OF ASG opinion of Ld. ASG to be furnished
to the Directorate
6.3. Reconsideration of ASG’s 52
Opinion
6.4. Preparation of RS Note for 53
Reconsideration
6.5. Submission to the Revenue 53
Secretary
6.6. Decision on Reconsideration 53-54
& Approval by Revenue Secretary
(RS)
6.7. Insights from the Directorate 54-55
MISCELLANEOUS
7. A BRIEF PRIMER ON 7.1. Jurisdictions of the Supreme 56-57
THE FUNCTIONING OF Court Relevant for Income Tax
THE SUPREME COURT Cases
7.2. Court of Registrar 58
7.3. Classification of Cause Lists 58-59
7.4. Classification of Cases 60-62
7.5. Article 136 of the Constitution 62-66
of India and Concept of Doctrine of
Merger
8. ROLE OF COURT 8.1. Process of payment of court 66-67
FEES fee for SLP
8.2. Timeline for payment of 68-69
Court Fees
8.3. Quantum of Court Fee (as on 69
Jan. 2025)

v
 8.4. Ad Valorem Fee Payment 69-71
8.5. Caveat Fee 71
8.6. Transfer Petition Fee 71-72
8.7. Monetary impact on tagged 72-73
SLP(s) due to dismissal of the lead
matter on account of insufficiency
of the case
9. LITIGATION 9.1. Live Streaming 73-75
MANAGEMENT TOOLS 9.2. Neutral Citation 75-83
AND PORTALS
9.3. eSCR 83-88
9.4. Video Conference Hearing 88-90
9.5. LIMBS: Legal Information 90-91
Management & Briefing System

vi
 LIST OF ANNEXURES
CIRCULARS
ANNEXURE C-1
Further enhancement of
CBDT Circular no. 9 of 2024, dated Monetary limits for filing
17.09.2024 of appeals by the
Department before
Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, High Courts
and SLPs/appeals before
Supreme Court:
amendment to Circular 5
of 2024-Measures for
reducing litigation
ANNEXURE C-2
Circular u/s 268A of the
Circular No. 5/2024, F. No. Income-tax Act, 1961 for
279/Misc.14212007-ITJ (Pt.), dated filing of appeals by the
15.03.2024 Department before
Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, High Courts
and SLPs/appeals before
Supreme Court-
measures for reducing
litigation
ANNEXURE C-3
Revision of exceptions to
Circular No.8 /2023, monetary limits for filing
appeals deferred under
No. 279IMisc.IM-93/2018-ITJ(Pt.), dated provisions of Section
31.05.2023 158AB

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

ANNEXURE C-4
Advice of the Ministry of
Law in cases in which
No.I-28015/01/2009 Admn. IV(LA), legal or constitutional
issues are involved.
dated 03.09.2009

vii
 INSTRUCTIONS
ANNEXURE C-5
Implementation of the
judgment of the Hon'ble
Instruction No. 1 of 2023, Supreme Court in the
F.No.279/Misc./M-54/2023-ITJ, dated case of Pr. CIT (Central-
23.08.2023 3) V/s Abhisar Buildwell
Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal
No.6580 of 202I).
ANNEXURE C-6
Standard Operating
Procedure on filing of
Instruction No. 2/2022, F.No.279/Misc./M- Appeals/SLPs by the
72/2022-ITJ, dated 15.12.2022 Income Tax Department
in the Supreme Court
and related matters.
ANNEXURE C-7
Implementation of the
judgment of the Hon'ble
Instruction no. 1 of 2022, Supreme Court dated
F.No.279/Misc./M-51/2022-ITJ, dated 04.05.2022 (2022 SCC
11.05.2022 Online SC 543) (Union of
India v. Ashish Agarwal)
ANNEXURE C-8
Revision of the
Guidelines for
Instruction No. 07 of 2016, engagement of Standing
F.No.279/Misc./M-75/2011 ITJ(Part-II), Counsels to represent
dated 07.09.2016 the Income-tax
Department before High
Courts and other judicial
forums; revision of their
Schedule of fees and
related matters.
LETTER
ANNEXURE C-9
Mandatory requirement
Letter issued to All PCIT by DGIT (L&R), of certified copy of orders
dated 09.10.2024 of High Court in SLP.

viii
ANNEXURE C-10
Filing of Proforma B1 for
Letter issued to all Pr.CCsIT/Pr. DGsIT by cases where
DDIT(Hq.)(L&R), Appeals/Special Leave
F.No.ADG(L&R)1/DDIT(Hq)/2023-24/2874, Petitions are not
dated 19.12.2023 recommended.

ANNEXURE C-11
Filing of Proforma B1 for
Letter issued to all Pr.CCsIT by cases where
JDIT(L&R)(Tech)F.No.JDIT(L&R)/Tech/2024- Appeals/Special Leave
25/2434, dated 24.07.2024 Petitions are not
recommended.

ANNEXURE C-12
Reg. Supply of Certified
copy or its copy of proof
Letter issued to DGIT(L&R) by AOR Raj in the case of Pr. CIT Vs.
Bahadur Yadav, dated 08.08.2024 Jewellock Tremix Pvt.
Ltd., Diary No.-
28483/2024.
ANNEXURE C-13
Tax litigation proposals
D.O. Letter from Department of Legal Affairs before the Hon’ble
(DoLA) LA- Supreme Court from
DoLA, M/o Law &
24/2282/2024-ADVICE-A, dated 09.10.2024 Justice.

ANNEXURE C-14
Engagement of
Letter issued to All Pr.CIT by JCIT(OSD), Additional Solicitor
CBDT, F. No. 278/M-23/2021-ITJ, dated General (ASG) to defend
09.06.2021 matters on behalf of
CBDT/Department –
Clarification.
ANNEXURE C-15
Appointment of Special
Letter to All Pr.CIT, Pr. DGIT and DGIT(Inv.) Counsels to represent
by Under Secretary, F. No. 278/MISC/M- Income Tax Department
23/2021-ITJ, dated 18.08.2021 before Courts and
Tribunals; Revised
Guidelines

ix
ANNEXURE C-16
Modifications to the
Instruction No. 7/2016
Letter to All Pr.CIT by ACIT (OSD) (ITJ -II), for engagement of
F.No. 279/Misc/M-75/2011-ITJ (Part-II), Standing Counsels to
dated 18.10.2016 represent the Income-tax
Department before High
Courts and other judicial
forums.
Supplying requisite
ANNEXURE C-17 documents/Annexures
for seeking
Letter issued to DGIT(L&R) by AOR Raj opinion/drafting of SLP.
Bahadur Yadav
dated 11.09.2024
ANNEXURE C-18
Revised Proforma B for
Letter issued to All Pr.CIT by submission of proposal
JDIT(OSD)(HQ)(L&R), to file SLP before
Supreme Court.
F.No.Pr.DGIT(L&R)/HQ/Proforma-B/2021-
22, dated 17.01.2022

ANNEXURE C-19
Submission of
Letter issued to All Pr. CIT and DGIT by Deficiency-Free SLP
DDIT (Hq.) (L&R), Proposals on E-office for
Timely Processing.

F.No. DDIT(L&R)(Hq.)/2024-25/02, dated

21.05.2024

x
 LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-1 Proforma B-1 Guidance Note

EXHIBIT-2 Legal and Research Tracking System

EXHIBIT-3 Jurisdictions of the Supreme Court of India

xi
 DISCLAIMER

• This SLP Manual is intended solely for the purposes of guidance and
internal use of the officers/officials of the Department. It is designed to
assist readers in understanding the procedures, laws, and principles
governing filing of SLP before the Supreme Court of India.

• While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and completeness,
this Manual does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for any Acts,
Rules, Orders, Instructions, etc. of various authorities. The statements
in this Manual should not be construed as the final authority about any
provision of law. For the same, the actual text of a provision of law or a
judgment or Circular etc. which are quoted in this book, may be referred
to.

• The content herein is based on prevailing laws, policies, and judicial

interpretations at the time of publication and is subject to change due
to amendments or new judicial pronouncements. Users are advised to
refer to the latest circulars, notifications, and legal updates for current
practices and procedures.

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in

any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other
electronic or mechanical methods, for any commercial use, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of the competent authority.

xii
 ABBREVIATIONS

A.Y. Assessment Year

A&J Audit and Judicial

AO Assessing Officer

AOR Advocate-on-Record

Art. Article

ASG Additional Solicitor General

CAS Central Agency Section

CBDT Central Board of Direct Taxes

CCA Controller of Certifying Authorities

CCIT Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

CIT(A) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

CJI Chief Justice of India

CSR Central Scrutiny Report

DGIT (L&R) Director General of Income Tax (Legal and

Research)

DIT (L&R) Directorate of Income Tax (Legal and Research)

Dy. No. Diary No.

F.Y. Financial Year

IAs Interlocutory Applications

ITAT Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

ITO Income Tax Officer

LIMBS Legal Information Management & Briefing

System

LRTS Legal and Research Tracking System

MoL&J Ministry of Law and Justice

OM Office Memorandum

Pr.CIT Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

xiii
 ROPs Record of Proceedings

SB Special Bench

SCA Special Civil Application

SCC Supreme Court Cell

SG Solicitor General

SLP Special Leave Petition

SQL/SQsL Substantial Question/Questions of Law

u/s. Under Section

W.P. Writ Petition

Judicial Bodies/Judicatures/Tribunals

SC Supreme Court

HC High Court

High Courts in India

ALL Allahabad

ALL(LB) Allahabad (Lucknow Bench)

AP Andhra Pradesh

Bom Bombay

Bom(AUR) Bombay(Aurangabad Bench)

Bom(NB) Bombay(Nagpur Bench)

Bom(GOA) Bombay(Goa)

Cal Calcutta

Chatt Chattisgarh

Del Delhi

Gau Gauhati

Gau(AB) Gauhati(Agartala Bench)

Gau(AIB) Gauhati(Aizwl Bench)

Gau(IB) Gauhati(Imphal Bench)

xiv
Gau(KB) Gauhati(Kohima Bench)

Gau(NB) Gauhati(Naharlagun Bench)

Gau(SB) Gauhati(Shillong Bench)

Guj Gujarat

HP Himachal Pradesh

J&K Jammu & Kashmir

Jhar Jharkhand

Kant Karnataka

Ker Kerala

MP Madhya Pradesh

MP(GB) Madhya Pradesh (Gwalior Bench)

Mad Madras

Mani Manipur

Ori Orissa

Patna Patna

P&H Punjab & Haryana

Raj Rajasthan

Raj(JB) Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench)

Sikkim Sikkim

U'chal Uttaranchal

AIR All India Reporter

ATJ Allahabad Tax Judgement

CTR Current Tax Reporter

DTB Direct Taxes Bulletin

e-SCR Electronic Supreme Court Report

ITJ Income Tax Journal

ITR Income Tax Reports

xv
 ITTD Income Tax Tribunal Decisions

ITC Income Tax Cases

SCC(Taxation) Supreme Court Cases (Taxation)

TAX LR Taxation Law Reports

SCC OnLine SCC OnLine

SCR Supreme Court Reports

MANU Manupatra

Neutral Citation System

INSC India Supreme Court

Allahabad High Court

AHC
Allahabad Bench
AHC-LKO
Lucknow Bench

APHC Andhra Pradesh High Court

Bombay High Court

BHC-AS
Bombay Bench
BHC-OS
Nagpur Bench
BHC-NAG
Aurangabad Bench
BHC-AUG
Goa Bench

Calcutta High Court

CHC-AS Appellate Side
Original Side
CHC-OS
Jalpaiguri Bench
Port Blair

CGHC Chhattisgarh High Court

DHC Delhi High Court

GHC Gauhati High Court

Gauhati High Court Aizawl Bench (High

GAHC Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram And
Arunachal Pradesh)

xvi
 GUJHC Gujarat High Court

HHC Himachal Pradesh High Court

HCM Manipur High Court

Karnataka High Court

KHC Principal Bench
KHC-D Dharwad Bench
KHC-K Kalaburagi Bench

Madhya Pradesh High Court

MPHC-GWL GWALIOR Bench
MPHC-IND INDORE Bench
MPHC-JBP JABALPUR Bench

MLHC Meghalaya High Court

PHHC High Court of Punjab & Haryana

RJHC Rajasthan High Court

RJJD Jodhpur Bench
RJJP Jaipur Bench

SHC High Court of Sikkim

UHC High Court of Uttarakhand

xvii
 DEFINITIONS

1. Adjournment: A postponement of a legal hearing or trial to a later date.

2. Adjudication: The legal process by which a judge reviews evidence and

argumentation, including legal reasoning, to make a decision on a matter.

3. Advocate-on-Record (AOR): An Advocate entitled under Order IV of

Supreme Court Rules.

4. Affidavit: A written statement confirmed by oath or affirmation, used as

evidence in legal proceedings.

5. Amicus Curiae: Latin for "friend of the court," it refers to a person or

organization not directly involved in the case but who offers information
or expertise to assist the court in deciding the matter.

6. Appeal: A legal procedure by which a party requests a higher court to

review the decision of a lower court or tribunal.

7. Appellant: The party who files an appeal in a court of law against a

decision or order.

8. Cause of Action: A set of facts sufficient to justify a right to sue and obtain
a judicial remedy.

9. Caveat: A legal notice to a court by a person who anticipates the filing of

a petition or appeal against them, requesting to be heard before any order
is passed.

10. Cause List: List of cases which the Supreme Court admits or hears or
pronounces order in, on a given day.

xviii
11. Certiorari: A writ issued by a higher court directing a lower court or
tribunal to send the record of a case for review.

12. Cognizance: The act by which a court formally accepts a case for hearing
or adjudication.

13. Costs: The expenses incurred in litigation, which may be awarded by the
court to be paid by the losing party to the winning party. Some costs are
also imposed as punitive measure by the court to discourage frivolous
litigation or in the case of contempt of court.

14. Curative Petition: A petition filed to seek a remedy after the dismissal of
a review petition, claiming that there was a gross violation of principles of
natural justice.

15. Decree: A formal and authoritative order of a court that resolves the
dispute and determines the rights of the parties involved.

16. Doctrine of Estoppel: A legal principle that prevents a person from

making assertions that are contrary to their previous statements or
behavior if it would harm the other party who relied on the original
representation.

17. Doctrine of Res Judicata: A legal doctrine that prevents the same issue
from being litigated again once it has been adjudicated by a competent
court.

18. Doctrine of Severability: A principle which allows a court to strike down

unconstitutional parts of a statute without invalidating the entire law,
provided the remaining portions are capable of standing independently.

xix
19. Equity: A body of legal principles that supplement the strict rules of law
and are aimed at achieving fairness or justice, often used when legal
remedies are insufficient.

20. Ex-Parte: Legal proceedings conducted in the absence of one of the

parties, usually when the party fails to appear.

21. Filing: The act of officially submitting a document or application to the

court for its consideration.

22. Inherent Powers: Powers that a court possesses inherently to ensure

justice is served, often exercised in the absence of specific statutory
authority.

23. Injunction: A court order that either compels or restrains a party from
doing something.

24. Interlocutory Application: A request made to the court during an

ongoing case, seeking a temporary order or relief until the final judgment
is passed.

25. Interlocutory Order: An order given by a court during the course of a

case, which does not resolve the case but deals with preliminary or
intermediate issues.

26. Intervention: A procedure that allows a non-party to join ongoing

litigation due to its potential impact on their interests.

27. Judgment: The final decision of the court, determining the rights and
liabilities of the parties involved in the case.

xx
28. Judicial Review: The power of courts to examine the legality of actions
taken by the legislative or executive branches and to invalidate actions
that violate the Constitution or other laws.

29. Jurisdiction: The authority granted to a legal body like a court to

administer justice within a specific field or territory.

30. Leave: Permission granted by a higher court to appeal against the decision
of a lower court or tribunal.

31. Limitation Period: The time frame within which a legal action must be
initiated, after which the right to file the case expires.

32. Locus Standi: The legal capacity or right of a party to bring a matter before
a court, typically meaning that the party must have a direct interest in the
outcome.

33. Mandamus: A writ directing a public authority or government official to

perform a mandatory duty.

34. Mentioning: The act of bringing a matter to the immediate attention of a

judge during a court session, often for procedural reasons like
adjournments or urgent hearings.

35. Merits: The inherent rights and wrongs of a case, as opposed to technical
or procedural aspects.

36. Miscellaneous Application: An application made in the court concerning

procedural or ancillary matters in a case, not directly related to the main
issue.

xxi
37. Obiter Dicta: Comments made by a judge in a legal opinion that are not
necessary to the decision of the case and therefore not binding as
precedent.

38. Order: A direction issued by a court or judicial authority that may not
dispose of the entire case but resolves a specific issue within the case.

39. Pendente Lite: Refers to actions or orders that are in effect while a case
or dispute is still pending before the court.

40. Pleadings: Written statements filed by the parties in a legal proceeding,

stating their claims or defenses.

41. Precedent: A legal principle or rule established by a previous court

judgment, which is followed by courts in future cases with similar issues.

42. Prima Facie: Latin for "at first glance," it refers to evidence that, unless
rebutted, is sufficient to prove a particular proposition or fact.

43. Quash: To annul or void a legal proceeding or judgment, often because of

a fundamental procedural error.

44. Ratio Decidendi: The legal principle or rationale underlying the court's
decision, which forms the binding precedent.

45. Ratio Legis: The reason or rationale behind a law, which may guide courts
in interpreting and applying the law.

46. Record of Proceedings: The official documentation of all actions,

submissions, and decisions that take place in a court case.

xxii
47. Remand: To send a case back to the lower court for further proceedings,
often after an appellate court reverses or modifies a decision.

48. Respondent: The party against whom the appeal is filed, who is required
to respond to the petitioner's contentions.

49. Review Petition: A petition filed requesting the court to reconsider its
judgment or order, typically when a significant legal or factual error is
claimed.

50. Special Leave Petition (SLP): A petition filed before the Supreme Court
of India, seeking permission to be heard in appeal against a judgment,
decree, or order of any court or tribunal in India, except military tribunals
and courts.

51. Stay Order: A court order that temporarily halts proceedings or the
enforcement of a judgment or order.

52. Sub Judice: Refers to a matter that is currently under judicial

consideration and, therefore, prohibited from public discussion or
comment.

53. Summary Judgment: A legal determination made by a court without a

full trial, typically when the material facts are not in dispute and only a
question of law remains.

54. Tribunal: A quasi-judicial institution set up to adjudicate disputes on

specific matters like tax, labor, and administrative issues.

55. Ultra Vires: Latin for "beyond the powers," it refers to actions taken by a
government body or corporation that exceed the scope of its legal
authority.

xxiii
56. Vakalatnama: A legal document signed by a litigant authorizing an
advocate to represent them in court.

57. Writ: A formal written order issued by a court directing someone to act or
refrain from acting in a particular way.

xxiv
 INTRODUCTION

The process of filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court
of India in direct tax litigation is intricate and unique. Unlike other litigations,
the Department does not have the discretion to independently select cases for
filing an SLP or choose the legal representatives for these cases. These critical
decisions are made by the Law Officers or Additional Solicitor Generals (ASGs)
under the Ministry of Law and Justice.

While the statutory timeline for filing an SLP is 90 days, delays often occur
due to the complexity of procedures and a lack of clarity regarding the process.
Historically, the Assessing Officer has been the primary point of initiation and
follow-up, which has led to considerable delays due to extensive back-and-
forth communication between the field offices and the central authorities.

To address these challenges, this SLP Manual provides a comprehensive guide

outlining the entire lifecycle of an SLP, from its inception to the allocation of a
Diary Number. The process broadly includes the proposal’s initiation from the
field offices to the Board, obtaining approval from the ASG, and completing
the stages of drafting, vetting, and filing the SLP.

This manual aims to equip officers in the field and those in the Directorate of
Legal and Research with clear, actionable steps to streamline the process and
minimize delays, ensuring timely and efficient filing of SLPs.

As per Supreme Court Rules, 20131, the time limit for filing an SLP in the
Supreme Court of India is 90 days from the date of the pronouncement of the
High Court judgment. Filing of SLP beyond the expiry of 90 days is not viewed
charitably by the Supreme Court, except in cases where the Hon’ble Court
decides to condone the delay. Each day of delay must be explained before the
court as falling within the four corners of “sufficient cause”.

1 Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Order XXI, Rule 1.

1
SLP MANUAL 2025
For the sake of convenience, the manual divides the stipulated period of 90
days for filing an SLP into six distinct phases, with each phase outlining the
involvement of different authorities and procedures. Phase 1 covers the
initiation of the SLP proposal by Field Formations, Phase 2 discusses the
processing of the SLP proposal within the Directorate of Income Tax (L&R) and
the office of Member (A&J), Phase 3 discusses the process of seeking the
opinion of the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) and subsequent processing
by the Central Agency Section (CAS) if the ASG agrees with the
recommendation to file an SLP. Phase 4 discusses the stage of Vetting of the
draft SLP petition carried out jointly by the field office and the Directorate,
Phase 5 covers the final stages of filing and listing the SLP by the CAS and
Phase 6 discusses the process of submission of a note to the Revenue
Secretary in cases where the ASG deems a case unfit for SLP, but the field
office or Directorate disagrees and seeks reconsideration.

Further, a Miscellaneous Chapter has been included addressing aspects of

SLP filing that do not fall under the above phases. The stipulated timeline of
90 days is structured to ensure that all tasks are completed within their
designated timeframes, allowing for a streamlined and efficient processing
flow. The pictorial breakup of 90 days for processing SLP is elucidated below.

2
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE 1
(DAY 1 to DAY 20)
FIELD AUTHORITIES

1. Commencement of SLP Proposal by the Field Formations

The litigation at the level of High Court is handled by the office of the PrCIT
in-charge of the Assessing Officer holding jurisdiction over the tax payer.
Therefore, the office of Pr.CsIT is entrusted with the responsibility of
proposing SLP against the impugned order passed by the High Court on
behalf of Income Tax Department. The office of PCIT has been given 20 days2
to process the file and forward a comprehensive proposal electronically to the
Directorate of Income Tax (Legal & Research) for further processing.

Image source3

2 Instruction No. 2/2022, dated 15-12-2022, Para 5(iii), Annexure C-6.

3Id.65

3
SLP MANUAL 2025
1.1. Process after Pronouncement of Order of the High Court

After the High Court order is pronounced, there is a stipulated timeline

of 15 days for the scrutiny of the order at the PCIT level. To ensure
adherence to this timeline, it is imperative to follow certain essential
steps to cut down the time and prepare an effective proposal.

a. At present, scrutiny reports against CIT (A), ITAT and High Court
orders are prepared in a linear manner, beginning at the Assessing
Officer (AO) level, progressing to the Range Head, and finally reaching
the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT). Since the cases
and matters reaching up to the level of Supreme Court are of utmost
importance, they need detailed discussions and deliberations.
Hence, it is recommended that, in cases involving revenue above the
monetary limit and adverse High Court orders, the PCIT office may
adopt a horizontal approach. This would involve engaging in
discussions with the AO, the Range Head, and the PCIT
simultaneously and generating a composite scrutiny report. Such
reports may be prepared after a presentation and round table
discussion to put more focus on sensitive and substantial questions
of law where high tax effects are involved. This approach would
streamline the process, significantly enhancing the quality of SLPs
to be filed while reducing the time taken as compared to the existing
linear method.

b. The Copy of High Court order at this stage can be downloaded from
the official website of the respective High Court as soon as it is
available. Usually, the court’s daily orders or judgments are
uploaded on the very same day or within 48 hours of the
pronouncement. The respective High Court Cell may be sensitized
that as and when order is pronounced in the Court, the respective
PCIT is promptly informed through an SMS message.

4
SLP MANUAL 2025
 c. An application for obtaining the Certified Copy of the High Court
order must be promptly made with the High Court Registry. As per
para 7 of the Annexure-I of CBDT Instruction no.7 of 2016 dated
07.09.2016, it is the duty of the office of Sr. Standing Counsel of the
High Court to apply for Certified Copy of the order.

1.2. Application for obtaining Certified Copy of Order

a. Once the order is passed by the High Court, the foremost thing to do is
to apply for its ‘Certified Copy’4 because SLP cannot be filed in the
Supreme Court without the certified copy of the impugned order passed
by the High court.5

b. In case, the certified copy is not available on the date of presentation of

an SLP, proof of application for such copy has to be adduced for the
court to consider the prayer for exemption.6

Recently, AOR in the Supreme Court has requested the Directorate to

obtain a formal undertaking from field offices along with the proof of
application for certified copy of High Court order. It is expected to detail
their efforts to obtain a Certified Copy of the High Court’s order which
is in the receiving stage. The field must include comprehensive
information, such as the date of application for the copy and other
relevant details regarding the status of that application. This initiative
is an attempt to establish a clear tracking system and better compliance
towards the process of SLP filing. The format of the undertaking is
shared below:

4 Order XXI, Rule 4(i), The Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

5 As per the practice direction issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its order dated
05.08.2024 in the case of Harsh Bhuwalka Versus Sanjay Kumar Bajoria, the SLP shall
be accompanied with the certified copy of the impugned order.
6 Order V, Rule 1(19), The Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

5
SLP MANUAL 2025
 SELF-DECLARATION

I, ________, son/daughter of ______, aged ______ resident of

____________, presently designated as _________ do hereby
solemnly declare and state as follows:

1. That I am proposing the filing of SLP in the matter of ______

against the order dated ______ passed by the Hon'ble High
Court of _______.
2. That I have applied for a certified copy of the High Court
order dated [Date of Order] on _______.
3. That the certified copy of the said order is pending since the
date of making the application and I undertake to submit the
same to the Directorate of Income Tax (L&R) forthwith upon
receipt, and I hold myself duty-bound to do so.
4. That filing of application seeking exemption to file certified
copy/other relief in the above-mentioned case may be resorted
to.
5. That I am competent to make this self-declaration and the
contents thereof are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

Verified at _______ on ______ that the contents of the above

declaration are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.

[Your Signature]
[Your Name]

c. Who is entrusted to apply for a Certified Copy of the Order? 7

The Standing Counsel is entrusted with the responsibility to apply for

a certified copy of the High Court order. The role of the standing counsel
is crucial in ensuring timely application for certified copy of the order
within two days of its issuance, or as promptly as possible. Once the
order is passed, the period of limitation commences, making it
imperative to immediately request for the certified copy. This proactive
step ensures that any potential delays do not burden the Department.
After receiving the copy of such order, it must be forwarded in original
to the Directorate.

7 Para 7.6 of Annexure-I of Instruction No. 07/2016 dated 07.09.2016, Annexure C-8.

6
SLP MANUAL 2025
 d. Separate Certified Copy for each petition/ appeal in which Hon’ble
High Court pronounced common order:
In cases where the Hon’ble High Court passes a common order for
different parties or for the same party for different Assessment Years, it
is essential to apply for certified copy for each case and each A.Y.
arising out of that common order. Applying for the certified copy of
the order in one or its lead case and downloaded copy of the same order
for other tagged matters, is seen to be generally not acceptable by the
Central Agency Section, MoL&J and the Apex court. If all tagged matters
are proposed to be agitated before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of
filing an SLP, then certified copy of the common order passed for the
lead and tagged matters should be applied separately. It is cumbersome
but at present this is being insisted by CAS as per relevant Rules.

1.3. Computation of limitation period w.r.t. Certified Copy

and filing of an SLP

1.3.1. Period of Exclusion

For the purpose of computing the limitation period for filing SLP, the
day on which the High Court pronounces its order is treated as “day
zero” and is excluded from the computation. The limitation period of 90
days begins from the day following the date of pronouncement of the
High Court’s order.8 In proposals submitted by field, date on which copy
of order received in PCIT office is mentioned. This date is irrelevant for
counting limitation for SLP.

The period of limitation freezes from the day on which an application for
obtaining certified copy is made to the Registrar of the court till the

8 S. 12 of The Limitation Act, 1963

7
SLP MANUAL 2025
 notification is made by the Registrar regarding the availability of the
Certified Copy. The time taken by the department in applying for the
certified copy from the date of respective order shall not be excluded and
thus, will be counted in the period of limitation. Hence, the department
needs to be aware and proactive in applying the certified copy of the
High Court’s order.

The period of limitation resumes from the date of availability of the

Certified Copy and not when it is collected. The availability of certified
copy will be notified by the Registrar of the court to the concerned party
or counsel (who has applied) through text message on phone.

Shift of burden in obtaining the certified copy has a back-and-forth

flow which is illustrated in the pictorial representation below:

1.4. Insights from the Directorate

a. The Directorate has experienced that significant delays in filing SLPs

arise due to the time taken to obtain certified copies of High Court orders
in the Pr.CIT Office. This delay is primarily attributed to the lack of an
efficient tracking system within the Pr. CIT Office to monitor the
pronouncement of orders in cases under its jurisdiction further leading
to delay in promptly applying for certified copies of High Court orders.

8
SLP MANUAL 2025
 To address this challenge, a possible solution could be to establish a
dedicated internal mechanism within the PCIT Office including
assigning responsibility to the empaneled standing counsel to provide
the PCIT Office with daily updates on cases pronounced. This will enable
the PCIT Office to promptly apply for certified copies of High Court
orders on the same day or, at the latest, by the following day, thereby
ensuring timely action and minimizing delays in the filing of SLPs.
b. A regular interaction with the concerned Standing Counsel is essential
to ensure clarity especially in complex litigation cases so that they are
effectively represented before High courts. This interaction should
continue if SLP is proposed.

1.5. Proposing SLP on E-Office

Traditionally, SLP proposals were received in the Directorate and

transmitted further from the Directorate to the MoL&J in physical
format, leading to inherent delays in the process of SLP filing. In August
2021, the Supreme Court in the case of CCE and ST vs. Bilfinder Neo
Structo Construction Ltd.9, while addressing the significant delay in the
filing of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) issued directives to adopt
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) initiatives to reduce
delays in litigation.

As a result, the implementation of the e-Office system was identified as

a key measure to expedite the processing of SLPs. Accordingly, the
Directorate of L&R started receiving and transmitting SLP files
electronically to the Department of Legal Affairs (DoLA), MoL&J. At
present, 100% of the department’s SLP proposals are processed
exclusively through the e-Office system up to the stage of drafting of
SLP.

9 Civil Appeal No(s). 674/2021

9
SLP MANUAL 2025
 The importance of submitting deficiency-free SLP proposals by the field
formations with all relevant documents on the e-Office platform cannot
be ignored, as the same e-Office file along with annexures subsequently
travels to the Ministry of Law for opinion of the ASG and further
processing. Ensuring the completeness of documents at the initial stage
facilitates efficient decision making by enabling all stakeholders to
access the required information promptly. This not only expedites the
overall process but also helps to minimize delays arising from the need
to address deficiencies or obtain additional information later. For
example, if in the High Court assessee has challenged Order u/s 148 by
Writ based on Change of Opinion, then the earlier assessment order
becomes a relevant document.

1.6. Creation of E-office file by Pr. CIT

a. After obtaining the approval of Pr.CCIT/CCIT, the next step is to create

an e-file through e-office website portal saccess.nic.in by the respective
Pr.CIT.

b. The field authorities can, after examination of the High Court’s order,
either propose for filing of the SLP or not propose for filing of SLP as
follows:

If filing of SLP is proposed: - Forwarding of SLP proposal to the

Directorate (L&R) along with the following attachments: -
• Proforma B;
• Facts of the case in brief;
• Append all RUD to e-file as receipt(option available in E-
office); and
• Key Points to Cover in PCIT’s Note.

10
SLP MANUAL 2025
 The data and file in E-office should be prepared carefully since the
same file moves to all offices concerned including the office of Ld.
ASG, MoL&J.

If filing of SLP is not proposed: - Forwarding of NO SLP proposal to

the Directorate (L&R) with Proforma B-1. The purpose is to create a data
base of accepted decisions in the Directorate.

1.6.1. If filing of SLP is proposed by the Field Authorities:-

a) Proforma B
Once it is decided that the SLP is to be filed against the decision of the
High Court, the Proforma B is to be filled in. At times, it is noticed that
the columns of the Proforma are either left blank or are not completely
filled. In such situations, a query is sent to the field by the Directorate
to send revised Proforma with complete details. To avoid such
situations of delays, all the columns of the Proforma should be filled
adequately giving desired details.

To assist in filling Proforma B, a Guidance Note is provided against

important columns which are as follows:-

PROFORMA B
S. Contents Input Comments
no. by field
1. (a) ITA No./WP No. of the judgment Information as per records.
(b) Unique 16-digit ‘Case Number Information as per records.
Record’ (CNR) No.
(c) High Court LIMBS ID Information as per records.
2. Whether there are multiple appeals This is meant to address a
involved in the order of High Court, situation where the High Court
passes a common order for
different assessees by bunching
litigation or sometimes for the
same assessee with different
Assessment Years.

11
SLP MANUAL 2025
 If yes:-
(a) No. of appeals involved in the Herein, please mention, number of
composite order of High Court appeals/ writs disposed through
common order such as ten, twelve,
twenty, thirty, etc.

Also, mention here that whether it

belongs to the same assessee or
different assessee.
(b) Whether SLP is proposed against It should be clarified whether
all the appeals involved separate SLP proposals have been
received for different assessment
years for the same assessee or
different assessee. If multiple
PCsIT are involved, it may be
stated here that there are
asseesees of other charges.
(c) If no, reason for not proposing In this column, reasons for not
SLP against all the appeals involved filing an SLP are mentioned.

For example: In AY 2010-11 and

AY 2011-12, SLP is proposed but
for AY 2012-13, SLP is not
proposed due to low tax effect.
3. i. Name of the assessee Information as per records.
ii. Address of the assessee Information as per records.
4. (a) Assessment Year Specific Assessment Year (s) for
which the Hon’ble High Court has
passed the impugned judgment
has to be mentioned.
(b) Income declared by the assessee Information as per records.
in ITR
(c) Income assessed u/s Information as per records.
143(3)/147/153(A)/153C/144
5. (a) Aggregate of Tax effect on issues This column is very important and
to be disputed. while sending proposals in cases
where it is a Writ matter or falls
under any other exceptional
clauses, this column is usually
found to be left blank. Even in
such cases, an estimated tax
effect10 should be quantified and
mentioned in this column.

For example: If the assessee has

filed a writ against the issue of

10 Calculating Tax Effect, Circular 5/2024, CBDT, 15.03.2024, Annexure C-2.

12
SLP MANUAL 2025
 notice u/s. 148 of the Act at the
initial stage itself. The Department
was in possession of information of
say Rs. 10 Crores of deposits in
Bank account as income having
escaped assessment, then the
estimated tax effect is close to Rs.
3.15 crores.

This figure becomes relevant for

processing SLP in highly critical
and revenue potential cases.
(b) Tax effect Issue wise involved in The field is required to identify
the SLP proposal. issue wise tax effect involved in the
proposal.
The said identification is
important so as to quantify the tax
effect in terms of circular no.
9/2024, if SLP is only
recommended on some of the
issues involved in the proposal.
6. Is the Tax effect below the limits The field is required to identify
prescribed in instruction on the aggregate tax effect in terms
monetary limits for filing SLP? If of monetary limits as detailed in
yes, please specify the exception circular no. 9/2024 and its
provided in the instruction in which exceptions as detailed in circular
the proposal is covered. no. 5/2024.
(a) Details of exception clause The field is required to identify
whether the case at hand would
fall under any exception as per
Circular no. 5/2024.
However, even in situations where
a case falls under the exceptional
clause, the field has to examine
the case on its merit before
sending the proposal for SLP as
per Para 3.1 of the CBDT Circular
5/2024 dated 15.03.2024.

In case of it falls under an

exception clause, the field is
required to:

a. Specify the estimated tax

effect involved and
b. Provide proper reasoning for
invoking the exception
clause.

13
SLP MANUAL 2025
 (b) Relevant documents (in case of
Audit Objection)
7. i. Date of High Court order The date of impugned Order
ii. Date of Limitation for filing SLP passed by Hon’ble High Court is
important in order to calculate the
limitation period for filing of SLP
before the Apex Court. It is
clarified that date on which High
Court order is received in PCIT
office is irrelevant.
iii. If proposal to Directorate of It is often seen that the field does
Income-tax (L&R) is sent beyond 21 not provide particular reasons for
days from the date of order, reasons delay in sending the proposal. The
for delay. field is required to specify the
reasons for delay in sending the
proposal to the Directorate. The
reasons provided should not be
general but specific reasons for
delay as to why the SLP proposal
has been delayed by the field
beyond 20 days from the date of
order of Hon’ble High Court. These
reasons are used for filing
application for condonation of
delay.
8. (a) Are the following documents, in Yes/No
one set of hard copy, enclosed
i. Certified copy of High Court’s As per the practice direction
judgment/order issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court
vide its order dated 05.08.2024 in
the case of Harsh Bhuwalka
Versus Sanjay Kumar Bajoria
(SLP (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s).
30456/2024), the SLP shall be
accompanied with the certified
copy of the impugned order.

In case, the certified copy is not

available on the date of
presentation of an SLP, proof of
application for such copy has to be
adduced for the court to consider
the prayer for exemption.

ii. Copy of memo of appeal u/s 260A It is essential to include all

filed before the High Court/writ relevant documents with the SLP
petition proposal. This step is crucial for
iii. Copy of order of ITAT ensuring a thorough review of the

14
SLP MANUAL 2025
 iv. Copy of order of CIT(A) case and for expediting the
v. Copy of Assessment Order/s processing of the SLP proposal
vi. In case of reopening u/s 148 from the Directorate to the
copy of notice, copy of reason Ministry of Law and Justice
recorded and approval of PCIT, (MoL&J).
objection filed by assessee and reply
of the objection.
vii. If, any documents are relied
upon/referred into for proposing
SLP, copy of the same
viii. (a) Any other relevant
documents
(b) The soft copy of the documents The Soft copy/ word format of the
is sent in CD as well as through proposal needs to be annexed with
email. the e-file as the same is required to
examine the case during the
processing of SLP and during the
course of drafting of SLP to be filed
before the Apex Court.
9. (i) Facts of the case in brief (in about The relevant facts are to be
300 words): mentioned in brief.
Separate sheets may be enclosed
for this purpose.
(ii) Information regarding SQsL The information regarding all the
before the High Court. SQsL raised before the High Court
and the details of the SQsL decided
S Substa Decis Relev Whet Rema in favour or against the
r. ntial ion of ant her rks, if Department is to be mentioned.
N Questi High Para the any
o. on of Cour of the SQL
Law t on High is Use a separate sheet (if required).
(SQL) the Court soug
raised SQL order ht to
before (held be
the in agita
High favor ted
Court or befor
again e the
st the Supr
Reve eme
nue) Cour
t
(Yes/
No)
1. N/A Agai Anne Yes
(CWP nst xure
Matter the ‘II’
) Reve
nue

15
SLP MANUAL 2025
 (iii) Whether all the question of law The field is required to identify if
(QoL) raised before High Court have the court has answered all or some
been answered in the order of High of the SQL.
Court. If no proposed action for the
same.
(iv) Whether the issue of perversity The field is required to reiterate the
has been taken as a ground before specific para(s) from the orders of
ITAT/HC. If yes please indicate the CIT(A) /ITAT /HC which are stated
relevant para of the order of to be perverse.
CIT(A)/ITAT/HC.
(v) If the disputed issue under The field is required to identify, if
consideration is involved in other the issue of the assessee has been
assessment years, then assessment adjudicated in some other AY on
year wise status of litigation in all similar issue and the status of
such appeals. appeals arising out of the said
orders.
10. The ‘Substantial Questions of The substantial question of law
Law to be proposed in the SLP’ arises on a question that is
debatable and not previously
decided and which needs judicial
interpretation.

The SLP shall be confined only to

the grounds raised before the
court/ Tribunal whose order is
challenged.11 However, the apex
court can, on its own discretion,
entertain new grounds raised for
the first time if it involves a
question of law which does not
require adducing additional
evidence, specifically one
concerning jurisdiction of the
court.12.
11. (a) If the judgment, to be contested, If the High Court has passed the
has relied upon another judgment, order by relying upon
then a copy of the relied upon the Judgment on a similar issue
judgment & its present status of passed by:
litigation, if ascertained.
(b) Has the relied upon judgment (a) Any High Court - The copy of
been accepted on merits or has not such order along with its
been accepted but not contested status (whether SLP was
further on account of tax effect proposed or the order was
being less than the limit prescribed accepted on merits by the field)
by the Board. shall be placed in the file.

11Order XXI, Rule 3(1)(c), The Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

12Saurav Jain & Anr. vs M/s A.B.P. Design & Anr, C.A. No. 4448 of 2021, dated 5 August
2021.

16
SLP MANUAL 2025
 [The information relating to status (b) The Supreme Court – A copy
of the relied upon judgment as of the order shall be placed in
indicated in (a) & (b) may be the file.
mentioned in the note to be
enclosed as per Sl. No. 8(viii) above]
12. (i) Name and present communicable Information as per records.
address of all the respondents
against whom SLP is sought to be
filed
(ii) E-mail address of all Information as per records.
respondents
13. Communication details of PCIT/CIT Information as per records.
(i) Name Information as per records.
(ii) Telephone Number Information as per records.
(iii) Fax number Information as per records.
(iv) Mobile number Information as per records.
(v) Official E-mail ID Information as per records.
14. Specific comments of the CCIT for The CCIT proposing the SLP
recommending SLP to be separately against the impugned judgment
enclosed with the proposal for needs to specifically note his/her
consideration of Board. comments by mentioning the
reasoning on which the SLP
should be recommended in the
present case.

b) Facts of the Case in brief:-

The facts of the case should start with the case name. Mentioning the party
name in the beginning of the case facts will give a clear identity of the party
who approached the court of law first and against whom the petition or appeal
is filed.

A special care is needed when the multiple files are being processed in the
case of sister concerns and taxpayers having similar/confusing names.

17
SLP MANUAL 2025
The facts of the case must include the following:-

● ‘who’, ‘when’, ‘what’, ‘where’, and ‘why’13 of the case including all the
events and occasions that occurred with its correct date;
● only the relevant facts important to the court’s decision;
● Issue of a case is a statement of a question of law that the court must
answer in order to provide justice to the aggrieved party. This is usually
quoted in the court’s/tribunal’s order which can either be extracted
from there or it can also be self-written which should start with
‘whether’, ‘did’, ‘can’, ‘does’, ‘is’, etc.14 to determine the issue in a correct
perspective and give it a standard format. There can be multiple issues;
● decision of the court and tribunal on the issue must be written in brief;
and
● reasons given by the court or judgments relied upon by it, if any, for
coming to the conclusion.

Despite notable efforts, some files lack the above ingredients in presentation
of facts of the case which makes the matter difficult to understand and more
time taking in processing the file. To address these gaps, it is recommended
to refer to the appeal memo or High Court/Tribunal’s order, which
summarizes the facts briefly.

c) Append all RUDs to e-file as receipt15

The relied upon documents are:-
✔ Forwarding to L & R
✔ Proforma “B”
✔ Reasons for delay (if any)
✔ Facts of the case

13 “How to brief a case”, University Northridge,

https://www.csun.edu/sites/default/files/HOW%20TO%20BRIEF%20A%20CASE_Saunder
s.pdf
14 Id.
15 Letter dated 21.05.2024, Annexure C-19.

18
SLP MANUAL 2025
 ✔ Substantial Questions of Law
✔ CCIT Approval Note Sheet
✔ Complete Scrutiny Report (CSR)
✔ High Court Order
✔ Assessment Order/ Penalty order/ or any order being the subject
matter of challenge
✔ Legal opinion of Standing Counsel
✔ Order u/s. 263, if applicable
✔ Order of CIT(A)
✔ Order of ITAT
✔ MA Order of Tribunal, if applicable
✔ Appeal memo before Hon’ble High Court
✔ Copy of judgment(s) relied upon by the Hon’ble High court,
✔ Copy of judgments relied upon by the field formation in rebuttal
of the impugned order,
✔ Status of the referenced/ relied upon judgments,
✔ Any other documents which may be relevant for filing SLP

i. Case-specific Documents
There may be cases where the assessee has invoked writ jurisdiction
against the impugned notice issued u/s 148 or impugned revisional
order passed u/s 263 of the Act. The relevant documents involved in
such case specific situations are to be attached and provided, even
though they might not have been mentioned in the RUD above or the
checklist.

For example: in Change of Opinion cases, original assessment u/s

143 takes places where the copy of notices issued during original
assessment, the response provided and the assessment order have to
be provided. Additionally, copy of reasons for re-opening u/s 148 is an
essential document and is to be annexed with the e-file.

19
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Thus, the field authorities have to ensure that the case-specific
documents are attached at the nascent stage while sending the
proposal for SLP.

ii. Attaching copy of Writ Petition, Counter Affidavit and other

relevant documents:
Recently, the Additional Government Advocate and AOR, CAS has
explicitly mentioned that it is essential to annex all the relevant
documents to assist in seeking opinion/ drafting of SLPs. The relevant
portion of the letter16, is reproduced herewith:
“…while sending the files for seeking opinion / drafting of
SLP, the relevant documents are not annexed. It is necessary
to attach all the relevant annexures marked in the writ
petition, counter affidavit and other related
documents if any filed before the High Court so that Central
Agency may able to draft SLP in proper way without causing
any delay.”

d) Key Points to Cover in PCIT’s Note:

The Pr. CIT’s Note while sending the file on e-office to the Directorate should
include the following points, wherever applicable:

i. Judgement relied upon by the Hon’ble High Court:

There may be instances where the High Court has relied upon a
previous case which was decided against the Revenue (field can check
with the directorate about the fate of P.Y.). It is therefore essential to
know the status of that previous case as to whether an SLP is proposed
against such a decision. If SLP was not proposed against the previous
decision, then, the reason for not proposing SLP against the decision
should be clearly indicated, i.e. whether it was accepted on merit or if

16 Dated 11.09.2024.(Annexure C-17)

20
SLP MANUAL 2025
 there was low tax effect etc. This will help in avoiding unnecessary
delay caused in obtaining the status of the relied upon case.

ii. Supreme Court’s judgment relied upon by the Hon’ble High Court:
The High Court may rely upon a judgment of the Supreme Court while
deciding an issue raised before it. In such a case, it is crucial to analyse
and indicate the distinction or similarity, if any, between the factual
background, questions of law involved and issues raised before the
Supreme Court’s decision relied upon and the decision of the High
Court.

iii. Hon’ble High Court’s reliance on assessee’s own case:

In some cases, the High Court relies upon the assessee's own case
which was previously decided by it. The copy of order of such a case
along with complete details of the case should be provided clarifying
with reasons if SLP was proposed against such a decision by the field,
despite having a clear precedence in assessee’s own case.

iv. Instance where Hon’ble High Court dismissed petition/ appeal on

delay without going into merit:
In decisions where the High Court dismisses the case due to delay, the
only substantial question of law arising is whether the High Court’s
decision to not condone the delay was justified. This is because the
High Court did not go into the merits of the case but dismissed it on
the initial point of delay. Therefore, the only point of argument
before the apex court should be to demonstrate if the Department
had sufficient cause for delay. Thus, reasons for delay have to be
clearly provided in the facts at the first instance in detail along
with the copy of application filed before the High Court for
condonation of delay.

1.6.2. If filing of SLP is not proposed by the Field Authorities:-

21
SLP MANUAL 2025
 a) Creation of Proforma B-1

In cases where SLP is not recommended/ contested by the Field

against the High Court’s order, Proforma B-1 is to be sent to the
Directorate by the field. The Pr. CCsIT are expected to collate all
Proforma B1 and send the same to the Directorate by the 5th of every
month by email at [email protected]

At present, the LRTS database of the Directorate of L&R does not keep
record/ database of orders of the High Court which are not contested
by Field Formation itself. These cases may be where the High Court’s
order is accepted on merit or where the tax effect is low and no
exception clause is applicable.

It is crucial to maintain a record of these cases not contested by the

Field because the Hon’ble High Court may rely on them in its future
decisions, involving the same issue/ question of law. To avoid the
hassle and delays in respect of obtaining the status of not contested
cases, Proforma B-1 has been introduced.

To assist in filling Proforma B-1, a Guidance Note is provided against

important columns as per Exhibit-1.

1.7. Insights from the Directorate

A. Maintaining a Record by PCIT of all the cases proposed before the

Supreme Court:
The PCIT’s office needs to maintain an updated record for all the SLPs
& High Court appeals filed. The High Court’s website shall be perused
on a regular basis to check the progress of the cases and witness the
live streaming or e-proceedings. This certainly keeps the judicial work

17 Refer to Annexure C-11.

22
SLP MANUAL 2025
 under check and swift actions can be taken when matter reaches to the
finality in the form of further appeal or the collection.

B. Utility of LIMBS:
LIMBS is an initiative of the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law
& Justice and is a web-based portal for monitoring and handling of all
court cases of all Government Departments and Ministries. It enables
Pr.CIT/CITs (LIMBS users) to access real time information of all pending
cases in their respective charges. With its many uses ranging from
knowing the status of the case, to next date of hearing to final judgment,
LIMBS portal integrates all the stakeholders (like nodal officers,
advocates, etc.) to get case information through a single unified
platform.

C. Cases where Apex Court remits the matter back for de-novo
consideration by High Court:
At times when the Supreme Court condones the delay and remits the
matter back to High Court to decide on merits, the Department should
be proactive to follow the appeal in High Court with the help of respective
standing counsel. Sometimes this opportunity of de-novo consideration
by the High Court as directed by the Supreme Court is not availed or
utilised by the Department and the matter is not pursued in the High
Court. A regular communication with the Directorate in such matters
can be helpful to keep a track of such cases.

D. Para-wise replies furnished by the Department before the Hon’ble

High Court and Scrutiny Report(s) prepared against High Court
order:
In cases, where the Department has submitted para-wise comments
before the Court, it should necessarily be made part of the SLP proposal.
This is because para-wise comments may serve as a valuable resource

23
SLP MANUAL 2025
 for constructing coherent legal argument and ensuring that all relevant
aspects of the case are effectively represented before the Supreme Court.
Scrutiny Reports prepared against the High Court’s order should also
be provided with the SLP proposal which will assist in focusing on
relevant legal arguments for sensitive legal issues before the Supreme
Court.

E. Condonation of Delay
Condonation of delay before the court requires demonstrating "sufficient
cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Sufficient cause is
determined by four corners:
1. Explanation for delay;
2. Length of delay;
3. Due diligence; and
4. Prejudice to the other party
If the cause falls within these four corners, the delay may be condoned,
regardless of its length. However, if the cause shown is insufficient,
irrespective of the period of delay, same would not be condoned.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court18 while laying down certain guidelines to

test the reasons for the delay has clarified that:
(i). Court’s power to condone the delay is discretionary in
nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient
cause is established in instances of inordinate delay,
negligence and want of due diligence;
(ii). relief granted to some individuals in similar matter
does not entitle others to the same benefit and the
cause for the delay will be judged on case to case
basis;
(iii). Merits of the case are not required to be considered in
condoning the delay; and
(iv). Delay condonation application has to be decided on
the parameters laid down for condoning the delay
regardless of any external conditions.

18Pathapati Subba Reddy (Died) by L.Rs. & Ors. Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (LA), 2024
INSC 286, decided on 08.04.2024

24
SLP MANUAL 2025
 In another case19, the High Court of Allahabad clarified that if
one person seeks relief from the court promptly after the cause
of action arises, others cannot benefit from the diligent efforts of
another person and approach the court at a belated stage.

The Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 29-11-202420 passed

certain stringent directions while imposing Rs. 1,00,000/- cost on the
State. The court pointed out that ‘sufficient cause’21 for condoning
delay cannot be interpreted in liberal sense where the negligence or
inaction or lack of bona fides is attributed to the party.
Further, the court directed the State to:

• Streamline the machinery regarding the legal issues, offering legal

opinion, filing of cases before the Tribunal / Courts, etc.,
• Fix the responsibility on the officer(s) concerned, and
• Penalize the officer(s), who is/are responsible for delay, deviation,
lapses, etc., if any, to the value of the loss caused to the
Government.
• These directions are to be followed by all the States.

The court also pointed out that the ‘sufficient cause’ has to be shown
from Day 1 till Day 90 as to why the SLP wasn’t filed within the time
limit and cause for such a delay.22 The events after the 91st day are not
relevant for condoning the delay.

19 2006:AHC:3054-DB
20 State of Madya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary, 2024 INSC 932
21 The Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5.
22 See also: Ajit Singh Thakur Singh and Another v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1981 SC 733.

25
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE 2
DAY 21 to DAY 40
DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (LEGAL &
RESEARCH)
2. Processing of SLP in the Directorate of Legal & Research

The Directorate of Income-tax (Legal & Research) , headed by the Director

General of Income Tax (L&R) is the nodal agency having the mandate to
process proposals on Direct Tax issues received from field offices, to provide
recommendations to the CBDT and to coordinate with the Ministry of Law for
filing of SLPs before the Supreme Court of India.

In the course of processing SLPs, the Directorate also identifies significant

legal issues that have a broader impact and provides inputs from a legal
standpoint to the Competent Authority to address these matters effectively.

2.1. Organisational Setup of the Directorate

The Directorate of Income Tax (Legal and Research) comprises of various
organs for the purpose of processing SLP proposals received from the field
formations. The Directorate reports to the Member (Audit and Judicial). The
Director General of Income Tax (Legal and Research)/DGIT(L&R) is at the head
of the Directorate; then there are two Pr. Additional Director General (Legal
and Research)/Pr. ADG(L&R)/ADG; then next in order are the respective zonal
Additional/Joint Director of Income Tax (Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R)), and zonal
Deputy/Assistant Director of Income Tax (DDIT/ADIT (L&R)). There is also an
Additional Director General (Audit and Inspection)/ ADG(A&I), but no core
functions relating to the processing of SLP is performed by ADG(A&I). The
following chart elucidates the organizational setup: -

26
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Chart- A
The Directorate, for smooth and efficient processing of the SLPs, has
sub-classified the states and the respective High Courts into various zones.
These zones are managed by the respective Pr. ADG (L&R)/ADG(L&R), the
respective zonal Additional/Joint Director of Income Tax (Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R)),
and zonal Deputy/Assistant Director of Income Tax (DDIT/ADIT (L&R)). The
following chart elucidates the zonal divisions of the Directorate: -

Chart- B

27
SLP MANUAL 2025
2.2. Timeline to be Observed by the Directorate for SLP
Processing

The Directorate, out of the stipulated 90 days for filing of SLP, from the
pronouncement of the order of the High Court, has an aggregate of 20 days
for SLP processing. The office of Member (A&J) has 3 days and one day is for
transit of the SLP proposal to Ministry of law, leaving the Directorate
essentially with 16 days out of the total 20 days.23 The table hereunder
illustrates the same: -
20 Days

The following division of time period of 16 days is largely followed for

processing the SLP proposal by the officers of the Directorate: -
16 Days

23 CBDT Instruction No. 2/2022, dated 15.12.2022, Annexure C-6.

28
SLP MANUAL 2025
2.3. Stages of Processing of a SLP Proposal in the Directorate
STEP- 1
Proposal forwarded to the Directorate- The SLP proposal forwarded by the
field authority, through E-office, is received in the Directorate by the respective
zonal ADG(L&R). This acts as the receipt of the proposal for processing in the
Directorate and then it is sent downwards electronically.
STEP- 2
A. DDIT/ADIT Analysis and Formulation of Opinion on the Proposal

(i). From the zonal ADG (L&R), the SLP proposal trickles down,
through E-office, to the concerned zonal Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R), who
in turn forwards it electronically for further processing to the zonal
DDIT/ADIT (L&R). The SLP proposal gets parked in the E-office
docket of the zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R).
(ii). However, before the zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R) can commence with
formulating his/her opinion on the SLP proposal, the zonal Income
Tax Inspector (ITI) verifies that all the relevant documents/orders
in terms of the mandate of Proforma-B are annexed by the field.
The deficient proposals are earmarked and sent back, through
E-office, to the field authorities for proper compliance, by the
zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R).
If the proposal is not found to be deficient then a limited
physical file is created and key details of the file are entered on
LRTS24 (in-house database software of Directorate) such as
Assessee details, Assessment Year, PAN details, and details of the
High Court order such as name of the High Court, ITA number,
date of order etc. The zonal ITI also prepares an Inspector Note,
which captures the facts of the case, the treatment of the case
before the tribunal and High Court and the comments of field
authorities like the AO, Standing Counsel, Pr. CIT etc. Thereafter,

24 LRTS discussed in Exhibit-2

29
SLP MANUAL 2025
 the physical file is made available to the Zonal DDIT/ADIT for
commencing with the processing of the SLP proposal.
(iii). The zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R) prepares an analysis note, with the
objective of determining whether the proposal sent by the field
merits filing of an SLP or any other legal remedy like Review petition
etc., before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The zonal DDIT/ADIT
(L&R) prepare the analysis note from an independent standpoint,
with the primary objective of analysing the suitability of the
proposal for adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
(iv). For the purpose of the said analysis, the zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R)
thoroughly studies the documents sent by the field, in accordance
with the mandate of Proforma- B. They also conduct thorough legal
research on the legal principles and judicial precedents relevant to
the proposal at hand.

B. Addl./Jt. DIT Analysis and Formulation of Opinion on the Proposal

(i). After the zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R), the file is sent through E-office
for the consideration of the zonal Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R).
(ii). In continuance of the DDIT note, the zonal Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R),
after thorough examination of the documents sent by the field and
taking into account the opinion of the zonal DDIT/ADIT (L&R),
formulates an independent opinion on feasibility of pursuing the
case in SLP before the Supreme Court. The zonal Addl./Jt. DIT
(L&R) during his analysis scrutinises the quality of SQLs sent by
the field authorities, ensuring that the SQLs reflect the correct legal
issue to be contended before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

30
SLP MANUAL 2025
C. Zonal ADG(L&R) Analysis and Formulation of Opinion on the Proposal

The proposal then is put up before the zonal ADG (L&R), who after taking into
account the proposal documents and the opinions of the zonal DDIT/ADIT
(L&R) and Addl./Jt. DIT (L&R), renders an independent opinion.
STEP-3
DGIT(L&R) Analysis and Formulation of Opinion on the Proposal
The SLP proposals from both ADG (L&R)-1 and ADG (L&R)-2 zones are put up
before the DGIT (L&R) for an independent analysis and opinion on the
feasibility of filing a SLP or seeking any other remedy before the Supreme
Court.
It is clarified that till this stage no final decision about filing /non-filing
of SLP is taken, and the opinions of the authorities in the Directorate
being of a recommendatory nature can either be in favour of or against
filing of SLP. The final decision on whether to file the SLP rests with the
Member (A&J).
STEP-4
Member (A&J) Analysis and Formulation of Opinion on the Proposal
Once the opinion of DGIT(L&R) is formulated the SLP proposal is forwarded to
the Member (A&J) for final opinion and approval. In case the Member (A&J)
approves the proposal for filing of SLP or any other remedy before the Supreme
Court, then it is processed further for the opinion of the Ld. ASG. If the
proposal is not approved then it is sent back to the field Pr. CIT with the
intimation of No SLP.

2.4. Key Aspects taken into Consideration during Formulation

of Opinion in the Directorate
The crucial aspects on which the Directorate examines the proposal
received from the field formation, includes, but is not limited to, the following:
-
(a) Identifying what is the core legal issue, if similar legal issue was
involved in any earlier AY, and if there is any substantial

31
SLP MANUAL 2025
 question of law involved or is the contention merely of a factual
nature;
(b) Examining the case which is relied upon by the High Court on
the aspects of its factual similarity vis-à-vis the impugned
judgement of the High Court in the SLP proposal; if it has been
overruled, if it has been challenged in the Supreme Court by
the Revenue; if it was accepted on merits or if it was not
challenged because of low tax effect. If any decision of the
Supreme Court is relied upon in the impugned judgement of
the High Court, it is ascertained if it is binding law of the land
or not.
(c) To determine if the substantial question of law in the impugned
judgement of High Court is similar to any SLP or Review petition
already pending before the Supreme Court, and if the impugned
judgment of the High Court is per incuriam for failing to take
into account any binding legal judgement.
(d) To scrutinise if the exception(s), as per Circular No. 5/2024,
relied upon in the SLP proposals having low tax effect, have
been appropriately invoked.
(e) To research any case law(s) or statutory provisions or any
legislative amendment in the favour of Revenue.

2.5. Insights from the Directorate

In order to ensure that SLP proposals sent from the field are free of
deficiencies, the following suggestions are listed hereunder: -

A. There is an inherent tendency in the field to propose SLP and in many

instances without furnishing any strong and convincing legal
justification against the order of the High Court. It should be ensured
that the comments of the Pr.CIT/CIT contain comprehensive arguments
justifying the proposal of SLP.

32
SLP MANUAL 2025
B. It is suggested that efforts be made to mitigate omission by the field
authorities to send documents like court or tribunal orders, Notices
issued, either during original assessment or reassessment etc., or the
orders of the CIT(A) or AO, or any other document crucial for formulation
of fair opinion by the Directorate. It is experienced that if there are two
or more orders of a court then only the latest order is sent. Whereas a lot
of times the Officers in the Directorate require a look at all the orders
relating to the case in the proposal. This omission becomes more
pronounced in certain cases which relate to special Acts or courts, like
the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 or cases involving NCLAT
proceedings.

C. Efforts be made to mitigate typographical, grammatical and syntax

mistakes in Proforma B, in the documents containing the facts of the
case, opinion of the field authorities, mentioning of incorrect figures, case
name or number and year, tax effect, order dates or any other relevant
date, court or tribunal name and the like. It needs to be ensured that
poorly scanned or illegible copies should not be sent. The SLP proposal
should be proofread to eliminate any such errors before sending the SLP
file to the Directorate.

D. When the Directorate sends a proposal back to the field for rectification
of any deficiency, it should be ensured that duplicate files containing the
same case are not sent back to the Directorate.

E. In cases of low tax effect where SLP has been proposed relying upon
exception(s), it is essential to provide justification on merits instead of
nearly stating the exception clause.

F. It is experienced that sometimes a non-binding order of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court, wherein leave is not granted in a SLP, is considered by

33
SLP MANUAL 2025
 the field as deeming the decision of the High Court as justified and laying
down the law of the land. On the basis of such assumption, the field then
erroneously, either recommends or does not recommend filing of SLP. It
is clarified here that as long as the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not grant
leave in a SLP filed by the Revenue, the order dismissing the SLP, whether
it is a speaking or a non-speaking order, or whether it merely states,
“heard and dismissed”, “dismissed”, “dismissed on merits” or “dismissed
as barred by time”, does not become binding or the law of the land.25

25 For detailed discussion refer to “Miscellaneous” chapter.

34
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE -3
(DAY- 41 to 71)
MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE

3. Processing of SLP in MoL&J

The process for filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court involves a thorough legal evaluation starting with field formations
submitting live files to the Directorate of Income Tax (Legal & Research). The
proposals are further analyzed by the Directorate and presented to the
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) after approval of Member (A&J). The Ld.
ASG provides a legal opinion on whether to file the SLP or not. The following
timeline has been stipulated for processing of SLP at the end of Ministry of
Law:

3.1. Processing of the SLP Proposal after approval by Member

(A&J)
A. Seeking opinion of Ld. ASG and preparation of draft SLP (Day 41 to
71)
i. The office of ADG (L&R) sends the proposal to MoL&J for seeking
the opinion of Ld. ASG. Many cases are also forwarded on the basis

35
SLP MANUAL 2025
 of consistency to the Ld. ASG. It is the first stage when the proposal
goes out of the Directorate of L&R/CBDT to another Ministry. At
this point of time, documents available before the Ld. ASG for
forming of opinion are as follows:
a. Proforma B, relevant documents/orders along with
recommendation of field authorities;
b. Analyzed notes from the Directorate;
c. Note from the Member, CBDT
The above documents ensure that a concrete proposal is presented
before the Ld. ASG in all aspects, encompassing facts and legal issues
involved.

ii. The ASG is a Senior Officer of Law appointed by the President of

India26. The ASG represents the Government of India in various
Courts and are responsible for arguing cases involving significant
public interest, constitutional matters and government policies.
The ASG’s opinion is highly valued and binding as per OM dated
September 3, 200927.
Ld. ASG considers the SLP proposals presented from a wider
perspective and renders legal opinion on filing or non-filing of SLP.
iii. If the Ld. ASG finds the case as fit for filing of SLP, then such
approval is conveyed to the Central Agency Section (CAS) for
further processing of SLP.
If the ASG deems a case as not fit for filing SLP, the same is
communicated to the field. If the field does not concur with the
opinion of Ld. ASG, the same may be requested for re-consideration
before ASG through the mechanism of a note seeking approval of
the Revenue Secretary. This process of filing a Revenue Secretary
Note is discussed in detail in Phase 4.

26 Law Officers (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1987

27 OM No. I-28015/01/2009-Admn.IV(LA), Annexure C-4.

36
SLP MANUAL 2025
iv. Central Agency Section (CAS) is a nodal agency of Department of
Legal Affairs (DoLA) within the MoL&J that acts as a bridge between
the Directorate and the Supreme Court for filing of the SLP.
v. Once the approval of Ld. ASG is conveyed to the Central Agency
Section (CAS), the CAS engages the Panel Counsels for preparation
of Draft SLP Petition. The drafting advocate plays a key role at this
stage.
The CAS-in-charge sends the docket to the Drafting Counsel,
mentioning the legal points, documents, and other material as
received from the Field. Hence, the quality of material being
supplied by the Field is of essence to the drafting and the overall
representation of the case at the Apex Court.
At this stage a major challenge faced by CAS is incomplete
documents in the SLP proposal. The importance of all orders being
supplied with the SLP proposal is of primary essence for many
reasons. The Supreme Court rules mandate that whatever (fact;
ground; annexure) is being placed at the High Court stage, only the
same needs to be placed at the Supreme Court.
In the absence of Copy of the Writ/Appeal in many cases, the
veracity of certain facts cannot be ascertained. At times, the
drafting counsel faces the problem in identifying the Parties of the
case at hand, whether which party is appellant or the respondent.
Therefore, copy of Writ, wherever applicable is essential to be made
part of the SLP proposal.
At times, the drafting counsel in case of paucity of documents or
details, culls out information from the Proforma B supplied with
the SLP proposal and may directly contact the officers concerned
of the field formation.

37
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE -4
(DAY- 72 to 78)
DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (L&R)
AND FIELD FORMATIONS

4. Vetting of draft SLP petition

The process of vetting is a critical step before filing Special Leave

Petitions (SLPs) before the Supreme Court and seven days out of the
total period of 90 days is allocated for this task. It involves a thorough
review of three essential components:
a) Vetting of SLP draft;
b) Submission of Annexures; and
c) Submission of Certified copy of High Court Order.
It is imperative to note that if any one of these components is missing
or incomplete, the vetting process is considered incomplete.

4.1 The process/flow of vetting of draft SLP is undertaken

through the following channels:

i. The Draft SLP Petition is sent from CAS to the Supreme Court Cell
(SCC) within the Directorate and further forwarded to Zonal
DDIT/ADIT for vetting. The demand letter of Court Fees is also
forwarded at this stage from CAS to the Supreme Court Cell at the
Directorate. A detailed discussion on the process of payment of Court
Fees along with timelines involved maybe found in the subsequent
“Miscellaneous” Chapter.
ii. Zonal DDIT/ADIT sends the Draft SLP Petition to the O/o the Pr.CIT
concerned in the field for Vetting.
iii. The primary defects to look out for at the stage of vetting by field
formations are:
38
SLP MANUAL 2025
 a. Annexures missing or wrongly marked;
b. Illegible and incomplete documents;
c. Any documents/orders in vernacular languages must be
accompanied with a translated version in English28 as per the
Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and Article 348(1)(a) of the
Constitution of India which lays down that all proceedings in the
Supreme Court shall be in English language.
iv. The field checks the entire Draft SLP Petition and attaches relevant
annexures wherever necessary and sends the vetted SLP Proposal to
the Directorate. This step must be completed by the 78th day.

Latest development in the process of vetting

Recently, following consultation with CAS, draft SLP petitions are now
being forwarded on E-office accounts of the respective Pr.ADGs/ADGs
instead of routing them through the Supreme Court Cell, and are
further forwarded to Zonal DDIT/ADIT. This revised process may bring
some changes in the existing mode of vetting process, although these
changes are still in the developmental stage and hence, are not
incorporated in this Manual.

4.2 Insights from the Directorate

The Directorate has experienced considerable delays in getting the SLP
vetted from the field, at times stretching over 400 days. The primary
reasons for delays are:

a. Non-availability of Certified Copy of the High Court’s order. (Relevance

of obtaining Certified Copy of High Court Order has been discussed in
Para 1.2 of Phase 1).

28 Rule 2, Order VIII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

39
SLP MANUAL 2025
 b. Change of position regarding filing of SLP due to latest development
of law having bearing on the proposed SLP, however the same is not
promptly communicated to the Directorate.
Illustration: In certain cases, such as Ashish Agarwal29 and Rajeev
Bansal30 which got decided, the field may lose interest in filing of SLP
due to changed circumstances. It is of primary importance that such
change in position must be communicated to the Directorate L&R via
mail at the earliest in order to safeguard the interest of the Revenue
and minimise unnecessary litigation.

c. It has been observed that most of the tasks related to vetting, such as
arranging necessary documents and corresponding with the
Directorate via email, are generally handled by staff of the concerned
field authorities. However, in many instances, the responses provided
are incomplete or fail to address the specific requirements outlined by
the Directorate. This results in repetitive submissions of deficient
responses, leading to unnecessary delays in the vetting process.
To address this issue, it is strongly recommended that officers
personally oversee and involve themselves in the correspondence
related to vetting. Their direct involvement will help ensure that the
required information is provided accurately and comprehensively and
the vetting process is expedited.

29 Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal, Civil Appeal No. 3005/2022, Supreme Court
30 Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal, Civil Appeal No 8629 of 2024, Supreme Court

40
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE -5
(DAY- 79 to 85)
CENTRAL AGENCY SECTION, MOL&J

5. Filing and Listing of SLP

The filing and listing of an SLP marks the final stage in its lifecycle, with
an allocated timeframe of 7 days for this process.

5.1 Process of Filing and Listing

Once the process of vetting is complete and the field sends the vetted
draft petition to the Directorate, the following process is undertaken:

i. Zonal DDIT/ADIT forwards the vetted SLP petition to the Supreme

Court Cell (SCC) in the Directorate after due perusal by Add.DIT/JDIT
concerned.

ii. The vetted draft and required annexures are further sent to the CAS
for the preparation of the Paper Book.

iii. One of the most common problems faced by the Panel Typist of the
CAS while preparing paper book is the issue of illegible documents
and incomplete documents, which creates problems in transcribing
the intricate details of the assessment order, etc. At times the font
size is small and sometimes the order is visually incomprehensible
making it difficult for the typist, thereby delaying the filing process.

iv. After this, the SLP is sent to the Directorate for signing of the Affidavit
and confirmation of Court fees deposition. There are currently 03
nominated DDITs in the Directorate, equivalent of the rank of Under
Secretary, who are designated to sign the Affidavit. The DDIT/ADIT
from the Directorate affirms the affidavit and the Advocate-on-Record
(AOR), then files the same before the Court.
41
SLP MANUAL 2025
 v. Thereafter, the SLP is sent to the Supreme Court Registry for filing
and the Supreme Court Registry generates a Diary Number.

vi. Upon receipt of the file in the Supreme Court Registry, the registry
scrutinises the file for defects (if any). The Registry informs the CAS
if there are any defects.

vii. There is a separate panel in CAS for curing/rectification of the

defects. Many SLPs remain pending in defect stage for considerable
time, therefore underscoring the importance of sending deficiency-
free SLP proposal. After curing the defects, the file is then re-
submitted to the Registry where the file is rechecked for any
remaining defects. If any defect(s) crops up, the same is informed to
CAS and then upon rectification, the SLP is finally submitted to the
Registry.

viii. After ensuring no defects remain in the filing, a number known as

‘SLP Number’ is allotted and the case is listed for hearing.

ix. Upon listing of the case, a date is provided in the Cause List issued
by the Registry of the Supreme Court. The intimation of cause list is
forwarded to Supreme Court Cell at the Directorate which forwards it
to the PCIT concerned. A detailed note on Cause List may be found in
the subsequent “Miscellaneous” chapter.

x. The Registry provides a web-link for viewing the Live Proceeding and
the CAS and the concerned AOR appear in the matter before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court on the date and in the Court mentioned in
the Cause List.

42
SLP MANUAL 2025
5.2 Insights from the Directorate

A. Allocation of Diary No. and SLP No.:

At the time of filing of every SLP before the Supreme Court, a diary
number which is an exclusive identification number is assigned to the
case. This number is crucial during the preliminary stages, as it helps
track the progress of the case until the registry verifies that the
petition complies with procedural requirements, such as proper
documentation and fee payment and is without any defects. Once the
scrutiny process is completed and defects, if any, are resolved, the
diary number is replaced with a permanent case number i.e. SLP
(Civil) number, signalling that the matter is ready to proceed and
presented before the Court. The Diary No. and SLP Number operate
independently and both can be used to search the case details on
Supreme Court of India (SCI) website.

• Importance of Diary Number

The Diary number is a unique number assigned exclusively to each

case and remains valid throughout the life cycle of the case. It is
essential to note that a Diary Number (along with the year when SLP
was filed) can be used by field authorities to fetch details/case status
of the proceedings from the website of the Supreme Court
(https://www.sci.gov.in/case-status-case-no ). The website contains
various functionalities which can provide various details of a case
including case details, details of advocates, earlier lower court
details, tagged matters, listing dates, notices, defects, previous
orders, memo, office report and record of proceedings of the case. For
illustrative purposes, relevant screenshots of the Supreme Court
website illustrating the manner in which Diary No. can be utilised is
reproduced below:

43
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Image- 1

Image- 2

44
SLP MANUAL 2025
Image- 3

45
SLP MANUAL 2025
Image-3

46
SLP MANUAL 2025
B. Civil Appeal Number:
The Supreme Court, while adjudicating SLPs exercises its discretionary
jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to decide
whether a case is fit for grant of special leave to appeal. The moment
Special Leave to Appeal is granted by the court, the case is converted
into a Civil Appeal and a Civil Appeal No. is generated.

C. IA (Interlocutory Application) No.: IA number is granted to

applications filed before Court seeking certain exemptions and
condonations.

D. Office Report:

The Supreme Court Registry is responsible for preparing an “Office

Report,” which provides a detailed summary of a case’s status and key
information. This report can serve as a vital resource for PCsIT for
tracking case progress effectively. The Office report is shared with the
AoR and can also be accessed through the Supreme Court of India’s
website by entering the Diary/Case number in the Case Status section
(highlighted above in Image-3).

An Office Report typically includes:

a) The type of list in which the case was included, such as the
supplementary or advance list.
b) The court number where the case was listed.
c) The item number assigned to the case in the cause list.
d) The next hearing date.
e) The petition number of the lead matter, along with related
applications and petitions.
f) The Cause Title, i.e., the official name of the case.
g) A summary of the case’s current status.

47
SLP MANUAL 2025
 The report also contains excerpts from recent court orders, details of
counsel appearances in the last hearing, and updates on compliance
with court directions. Unlike the Record of Proceedings, which
focuses on a specific hearing, the Office Report offers broader case-
related information, such as details of written submissions or
affidavits filed by parties. It allows stakeholders to monitor cases and
to stay informed about submissions made by parties involved.

5.3 Engagement of Counsels

The Department, in order to curtail Tax evasion and ensure robust tax
compliance, engages counsels at the Apex Court to present its case. The
Ld. ASG along with the Advocate–on-Record represents the Revenue at
the Supreme Court.

A. Additional Solicitor General of India (ASG)

The ASG is a Senior Officer of Law appointed by the President of India31.
The ASG represents the Government of India in various Courts and are
responsible for arguing cases involving significant public interest,
constitutional matters and government policies. The ASG’s opinion is
highly valued and binding as per OM dated September 3, 200932.
B. Advocate on Record (AOR)
i. Advocate-on-Record is an advocate who is entitled under the
Supreme Court Rules, 201333, framed by the Supreme Court of
India under Article 145 of the Constitution of India, to act as well as
to plead for a party in the Supreme Court of India.
ii. In certain cases, even a Law Firm can be registered as AOR. The law
firm with all its partners as AORs can get itself registered as a AOR
and the client/s be represented in the name of the firm.

31 Law Officers (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1987

32 OM No. I-28015/01/2009-Admn.IV(LA), Annexure C-4.
33 Order IV of The Supreme Court Rules, 2013

48
SLP MANUAL 2025
 iii. The Department peruses the aid of AOR for representation of its
cases at the Apex Court. The AOR representing the Department are
appointed through the Ministry of Law & Justice (MoLJ). The
MoL&J, upon deeming the SLP proposal received from the
Directorate of L&R as fit, forwards it to the CAS which then engages
AORs designated for Tax matters.

5.4 Efforts undertaken by the Directorate of Income Tax

(Legal & Research):

A. Proceedings/Orders/Judgments and RoP Analysis

The Supreme Court Cell within the Directorate closely monitors SLPs
decided by the Supreme Court on a monthly basis. The Records of
Proceedings (RoPs), downloaded from the Supreme Court website during
the month, are thoroughly analyzed to identify necessary action points
for the Directorate and the Department. Decisions favoring revenue and
having significant ramifications are circulated to the relevant field
formations for appropriate action.

B. Preparation of Cause-List of Cases Being Heard in the Supreme

Court (On a Daily Basis)
The daily cause list of cases scheduled for hearing in the Supreme Court
is downloaded from the Supreme Court website. The concerned field
formations are promptly informed to ensure their preparedness on a
regular basis.

C. Court fee
The Directorate has undertaken coordination with the Advocate-on-
Record (AOR) to address delays related to the processing of court fees.
It was conveyed to the Central Agency Section (CAS) that such delays in

49
SLP MANUAL 2025
 processing court fees contribute significantly to the overall delay in filing
Special Leave Petitions (SLPs). In response, CAS has agreed to issue the
demand letter for court fees simultaneously with the draft vetting
proposal so that the entire process of vetting and payment of Court Fee
can happen in a parallel manner. This procedural change has reduced
the processing time by approximately 6 days.
A detailed discussion on the process of payment of Court Fees along
with timelines involved maybe found in the subsequent “Miscellaneous”
chapter.

D. Vetting of SLP Proposals

The Directorate has taken steps to reduce delays in the vetting of SLP
proposals by field formations. The DGIT (L&R) issued a correspondence
to field formations, emphasizing the need to obtain certified copies of
High Court Orders for filing SLPs before the Supreme Court.
Additionally, Principal CCIT regions with the highest pendency in vetting
have been informed to expedite the disposal of vetting proposals.

50
SLP MANUAL 2025
 PHASE 6
REVENUE SECRETARY NOTE (RS NOTE)

6. SLP processing where field disagrees with opinion of ASG

The SLP proposals recommended for filing by the Directorate and

approved by the Member (A&J) are submitted to Law Officers, usually the
Additional Solicitor General (ASG), who is appointed by the Department of
Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice. The process regarding processing of
SLP in cases where Ld. ASG deems the case as fit for filing SLP has been
discussed in previous chapters.

In cases where the Ld. ASG opines against filing of SLP, then the opinion of
the ASG is communicated to the PCIT concerned in the field and the field is
expected to convey their acceptance or non-acceptance of the ASG’s opinion
promptly. Wherever the field accepts the opinion of the ASG, SLP is not
pursued further in the case except in very rare cases where the Directorate
may feel that the ASG’s opinion needs reconsideration on account of latest
position of Law which may have wide ramification.
In cases where field does not accept the opinion of the Ld. ASG, a structured
step by step procedure followed is outlined below.

6.1. Communication of ASG Opinion to the field

The opinion of the ASG not to file an SLP is conveyed to the proposing PCIT
by the respective ADIT/DDIT of the Zone via email. The PCIT is expected to
convey acceptance or non-acceptance of the ASG's opinion promptly since,
delayed communication in this regard (e.g., after six months in certain cases)
disrupts subsequent processing.

51
SLP MANUAL 2025
6.2. Comments of field on the opinion of Ld. ASG to be
furnished to the Directorate

At this stage, if the field does not accept the ASG's opinion or disagrees with
it; then field must communicate its non-acceptance of ASG’s opinion with
detailed reasons thereof.

6.3. Reconsideration of ASG’s Opinion:

In cases where field does not accept the opinion of the Ld. ASG, the
Directorate, is then tasked with analyzing as to whether there are compelling
justification on legal grounds to present the case for re-consideration of ASG’s
opinion.

The ASG’s opinion is considered highly valued and binding as per OM dated
September 3, 200934. Reconsideration is permitted only under exceptional
circumstances and requires the identification of legal or factual points not
addressed by the ASG, and evidence of wider ramifications if the adverse
decision is not challenged. The Reconsideration is permissible only with the
approval of the Secretary, Department of Revenue through a Note which is
colloquially called the RS Note.

The detailed reasoning of the field's non-acceptance of the ASG’s opinion,

along with the Directorate's analysis note, is submitted before the Member
(A&J) to consider whether the case is fit to be placed for reconsideration of the
ASG's opinion. Once the Member concurs with the analysis, the preparation
of the RS Note begins in the Directorate. The structured process of filing RS
Note ensures that only exceptional and deserving cases are escalated for
reconsideration.

34 OM No. I-28015/01/2009-Admn.IV(LA), Annexure C-4.

52
SLP MANUAL 2025
6.4. Preparation of RS Note for Reconsideration

Once the approval of the Member is granted for filing of RS Note, the RS Note
is prepared in the Directorate based on inputs from the field formations and
existing records, including:
• Proforma B;
• Orders from AO, CIT(A), ITAT, and High Court;
• Opinion of the ASG and comments of the field thereof.
Field formations may propose a reconsideration of the ASG’s opinion only in
exceptional and deserving cases along with cogent reasons.

6.5. Submission to Revenue Secretary

A concise and well-structured RS Note is presented by CBDT before the

Revenue Secretary. The presentation includes comprehensive reasoning,
factual/legal analysis, and the potential ramifications of the decision.

6.6. Decision on Reconsideration & Approval by Revenue

Secretary (RS)

The RS evaluates the RS Note submitted by the Directorate as to whether the

proposal contains substantive legal arguments warranting reconsideration
before Ld. ASG. If approved, the Directorate submits the matter to the
Department of Legal Affairs for reconsideration by the ASG.

Thereafter, if the Ld. ASG opines that the instant case is not fit enough for
further reconsideration to process the matter before the Supreme Court then
the file is returned to the Directorate which further communicates it to the
field formations.

However, in cases where the Ld. ASG finds the case to be fit for filing of an
SLP then the reconsidered opinion also gets communicated to the Directorate

53
SLP MANUAL 2025
and further process of filing of an SLP as discussed in earlier chapters gets
initiated.

6.7. Insights from the Directorate

A. Essential components of Revenue Secretary Note

The cardinal requirement in the reconsideration proposal must be
points of fact and law that have not been appreciated by the ASG while
rendering an opinion which is not acceptable to the Department. It must
also be appreciated by the field formations that the office of DGIT(L&R)
and CBDT is bound to make a presentation before the Revenue
Secretary to convince that there exist plausible reasons in the case for
sending a suitable reference to the Department of Legal Affairs for
reconsideration.
Based on the experience of RS notes in the Directorate, it is proposed
that the field formations sending proposals for reconsideration of ASG
opinion should contain the following notes:-
a) A comprehensive note containing a point-wise rebuttal/ response to
the opinion of ASG with specific emphasis on the points where the
Department has difference of opinion giving full reasoning as Note-1.
b) A note on the law point and specific details of decided case law
on the provisions / Sections of the statute in respect of which a
Substantial Questions of Law(SQL) has arisen which need to be
agitated before the Supreme Court of India. This note should contain
a section-wise discussion as Note-2.
c) A note on any specific/ peculiar facts of the case from which a
substantive question of law (SQL) has arisen that needs to be agitated
before the Supreme Court of India. This note should contain fact-wise
discussion and the consequent emergence of SQL as Note-3.

54
SLP MANUAL 2025
 d) Along with the proposal, the field may also attach a
Miscellaneous Note containing materials as under:
i. whether the decision of High Court has wider ramifications if not
challenged before the Supreme Court,
ii. whether there is any decision given by the other High Court in
the favour of the department,
iii. whether the issue requires any legislative amendment in the
statute or Rules or any clarification.

B. Guiding Principles for Reconsideration Proposals

Procedural Guidelines
i. Timelines: All communications and processes should adhere to
strict timelines to prevent unnecessary delays.
ii. Exceptional Cases Only: Reconsideration of ASG opinions should
be pursued only in rare cases with strong legal and factual
grounds.
iii. Documentation: Comprehensive and concise documentation is
crucial at all stages to facilitate decision-making.
iv. Coordination: Seamless coordination between field formations,
DGIT (L&R), CBDT, and the Department of Revenue is essential for
efficient processing.

This framework ensures clarity, accountability, and efficiency in the legal

processes associated with SLPs which require reconsideration of the opinion
of the ASG.

55
SLP MANUAL 2025
 MISCELLANEOUS

7. A Brief Primer on the Functioning of the Supreme Court

7.1. Jurisdictions of the Supreme Court Relevant for Income

Tax Cases
The Supreme Court, hierarchically, is the highest constitutional court
of India, and the Constitution of India equips the Supreme Court with a
number of jurisdictions discussed in detail in Exhibit-3. However, for the
purpose of Income Tax, cases are mostly brought before the Supreme Court
by way of Special Leave Petition jurisdiction under Article 136(1) of the
Constitution of India.

(a) Special Leave Petition (Art. 136(1)- the Supreme Court,

exercises its discretionary extra-ordinary appellate jurisdiction to
adjudicate an appeal by granting special leave from any
judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause
or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory
of India.

Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme

Court can operate beyond the limitations and conditions of its
Appellate jurisdiction contained in Article 133 of the Constitution
of India. The Supreme Court, can hear appeals not only from the
High Courts but also from other adjudicatory authorities like the
tribunals or directly from the subordinate courts if the situation
necessitates bypassing usual procedure of filing appeal in the
High Court.

Unlike under Article 133 of the Constitution of India,

there is no requirement of obtaining a certificate for appeal from
the High Court for preferring an appeal under Article 136 of the
Constitution of India in the Supreme Court, thus the appellant is

56
SLP MANUAL 2025
 not bound by the opinion of the High Court on whether the
appeal before the Supreme Court is maintainable or not. Even if
the High Court refuses to grant certificate for appeal under
Article 133 of the Constitution of India, appeal can be heard under
Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
An SLP is maintainable even against the order of a
court or tribunal which the statute declares as final, which would
not be appealable under Article 133 jurisdiction. Even where a
statute does not provide for appeal, the Supreme Court may hear
such an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
However, it would be wrong to interpret that Article 136 of the
Constitution of India confers a right to prefer an appeal on a
person, it merely bestows the Supreme Court with a plenary
discretion to grant special leave for hearing an appeal.

(b) Civil Appeal and Certificate of Appeal (Art. 133 and 134A):

The Constitution also provides for filing of appeal in the Supreme Court
by way of Civil Appeal as per Article 133 and 134A of the Constitution of
India and under Section 261 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, this
jurisdiction is rarely invoked in respect of Income Tax cases.

An appeal under Article 133 of the Constitution of India, is maintainable

from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High
Court, if the High Court by issue of a certificate of appeal, under Article
134A of the Constitution of India, certifies that the case involves a
substantial question of law of general importance and that, in the
opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be decided by the
Supreme Court. Thus, unlike under Article 136 of the Constitution of
India, an aggrieved party cannot prefer a civil appeal under Article 133
of the Constitution of India to the Supreme Court as a matter of right
without the grant of certificate for appeal under Article 134A of the
Constitution of India.

57
SLP MANUAL 2025
7.2. Court of Registrar

The Registrar undertakes administrative work and exercises Court’s

powers relating to certain procedural matters listed in the Supreme Court
Rules. As per the Supreme Court rules35 the Registrar undertakes the seminal
task of preparing and listing of the cause list containing the list of cases to be
heard by the benches of the Supreme Court. As per the Rules36, inter alia, the
Registrar makes direction for amendment of petition of appeal or other
proceeding presented in the Court, fixes the date of hearing of appeals,
petitions or other proceedings, issues notices, grants leave to inspect and
search the Court record and order the grant of copies of documents to the
parties. The Registrar exercises the power of the court in respect of certain
matters as enunciated in the Rules like application for cancellation of date on
the written joint request of the appearing parties provided the matter has not
been listed in the final cause list, application for condonation of delay in re-
filing, application for condoning delay in paying deficit court fee, etc.37 An
appeal may be preferred against the order passed by Registrar while exercising
the powers of the Court, before a single Judge in Chambers, within 15 days of
making such order.38

7.3. Classification of Cause Lists

The cause list is an integral part of justice administration, since through

a cause list the parties, judges and the lawyers are notified of the matters
which will be taken up by the court. In the Supreme Court various types of
cause lists are published by the Registrar of the Court in the website of the
Supreme Court (https://www.sci.gov.in/cause-list/ ) and the same are
detailed as hereunder:

(a) Advance cause list- the advance cause list is published by the Registrar
containing a list of fresh miscellaneous admission hearing matters

35 Order III Rule 7, Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

36 Order III Rule 8, Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
37 Order V Rule 1, Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
38 Order V Rule 3, Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

58
SLP MANUAL 2025
 which are likely to be listed before the Supreme Court tentatively on
Mondays and Fridays in the next week. The list for matters to be listed
on Mondays is issued on Thursday in the previous week and on Monday
in the same week for matters to be listed on Fridays. The admission
hearing matters are listed before the Supreme Court on Mondays and
Fridays, unless the Chief Justice otherwise directs.
(b) Main or Daily cause list- the miscellaneous admission hearing
matters, which includes fresh cases from the advance cause list,
pending main cases as also interlocutory and miscellaneous
applications in main cases, after notice cases etc., are then listed in the
Daily Cause List of Miscellaneous matters to be heard on Mondays and
Fridays. Unlike the advance cause list of admission hearing matters, the
daily cause list specifies the bench before which the matter is listed for
a set day for hearing. In admission hearing the Court decides whether
to admit or dismiss an appeal or any application.
(c) Regular cause list- this cause list contains matters which have been
admitted by the Court, after issue of notice to the other party, which
require full-fledged hearing for a decision. The regular hearing matters
are taken up by the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday, and a daily cause list of regular hearing matters to be listed
on Tuesday is issued on Saturday of the preceding week, and a daily list
containing regular hearing matters to be listed on Wednesday and
Thursday is issued on the previous working day. The matters in these
lists are taken from the weekly list.
(d) Weekly cause List- it is an advance list of regular hearing matters to
be listed on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of a week. It is issued
on Friday in the preceding week.
(e) Supplementary cause list- the matters which are directed to be listed
after the issue of daily cause list of either miscellaneous admission
hearing matters or regular hearing matters, which could not be shown
in the main list are listed through the Supplementary List.

59
SLP MANUAL 2025
7.4. Classification of Cases

(a) Special Leave Petition (SLP)- as discussed above, the Supreme Court,
under Article 136(1) of the Constitution of India, entertains SLP.

(b) Civil Appeal- as discussed above, there are two ways through which an
appeal may be preferred before the Supreme Court, firstly under Article
133 of the Constitution of India by obtaining leave to appeal under Article
134A of the Constitution of India, from the High Court, and secondly
under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by filing SLP.

(c) Review Petition- by virtue of Article 137 of the Constitution of India

the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgement pronounced
or order made by it. A review petition is maintainable before the
Supreme Court on the following grounds:

i. discovery of new and important matter of evidence;

ii. mistake or error apparent on the face of the record;
iii. any other sufficient reason, e.g., that there are in the judgment
certain unmerited observations against the petitioner.
The power of review is different from the power of appeal of the Supreme
Court and the Court does not exercise its appellate jurisdiction while
hearing a review petition, as such a review does not involve rehearing of
the appeal all over again. In a review petition the Court essentially re-
examines or reconsiders an issue already decided by it. The Review
jurisdiction of the Court is based on basic philosophy of acceptance of
human fallibility.

(d) Curative Petition- on very restricted grounds, even after the dismissal
of review petition, the Supreme Court in exercise of its inherent power
may still review the case under a curative petition. The power to hear
curative petition was first laid down by the Supreme Court in the Case

60
SLP MANUAL 2025
 of Rupa Ashok Hurra Vs. Ashok Hurra39, wherein the court observed
that, “…this Court, to prevent abuse of its process and to cure a gross
miscarriage of justice, may reconsider its judgement in exercise of its
inherent power.” The curative power may be exercised on the following
grounds:

i. variation of the principle of natural justice, as for example,

when the affected person was not served notice or not heard
during the proceedings;
ii. a Judge who participated in the decision-making process did
not disclose his links with a party to the case, i.e., the question
of bias;
iii. abuse of the process of the court.

The list of grounds is not exhaustive and the Court has discretion to
entertain a curative petition on any other substantial ground which
perpetuates injustice.

(e) Caveat application- S.148A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,

enunciates the right of a person to lodge a caveat with the court. It
provides that, “Where an application is expected to be made, or has been
made, in a suit or proceeding instituted, or about to be instituted, in a
Court, any person claiming a right to appear before the Court on the
hearing of such application may lodge a caveat in respect thereof.” A
caveat is pre-emptive formal notice lodged by a person, i.e., caveator,
who expects to be heard before any order or pronouncement is made in
an prospective legal proceeding involving him. Thus, after the
caveat is filed the Court has to notify the caveator of any
application, petition or appeal which is filed by the other party, i.e.,
the caveatee. The threefold objectives of a Caveat are: -

39 (2002) 4 SCC 388.

61
SLP MANUAL 2025
 i. It safeguards the interest of a caveator so that any ex-parte
decree can be avoided.
ii. It seeks to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
iii. By filing of a caveat, a caveator gets a fair chance of being heard.

7.5. Article 136 of the Constitution of India and Concept of

Doctrine of Merger

The doctrine of merger and Article 136 of the Constitution of India are
interlinked, and the doctrine kicks in when the leave is granted in a SLP.
Under Art.136, a SLP is dealt in two stages. The first stage is the discretionary
stage wherein the Supreme Court decides whether a case is a fit case for grant
of special leave to appeal. The second stage is appellate stage, which
commences if special leave to appeal is granted and the SLP is converted into
a civil appeal, whereby the Court exercises its appellate jurisdiction and hears
the appeal on merits. The conversion of SLP into a civil appeal is reflected in
the judgements of the Supreme Court. Therefore, the judgments mention in
the beginning the following, “Civil Appeal No.____ /year (Arising out of Special
Leave Petition No.____/year)”, and the judgement also notifies before
beginning of the text of the judgment, “Leave granted.” The following image
shows the same:

62
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Whereas, if special leave to appeal is not granted and the petition is
dismissed it means the Court in its discretion did not find it to be a fit case
for invoking its appellate jurisdiction by grant of special leave to appeal under
Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Once special leave to appeal is granted by the Supreme Court, the

doctrine of merger becomes applicable to the case at once. If the Court does
not grant the special leave to appeal at the discretionary stage of Article 136
of the Constitution of India, i.e., the SLP is dismissed in limine , the doctrine
of merger would not apply. The doctrine of merger lays down that once an
appeal or revision is preferred against the order of a subordinate judicial
forum, and the Supreme Court modifies, reverses or affirms the order of the
subordinate judicial forum, then the impugned order of the subordinate
judicial forum ceases to exist, and it is merged with the order of the Supreme
Court. On this merger, the operative and authoritative value only remains with
the order of the Supreme Court, and a review or reconsideration or recall of
the order of the subordinate judicial forum in any Court other than the
Supreme Court, by any party, is not permissible.

The doctrine of merger bars the High Court from entertaining a review
petition or any other statutory remedy in respect of the impugned order. Once
leave has been granted in a Special Leave Petition, regardless of whether such
appeal is subsequently dismissed with or without reasons, the doctrine of
merger comes into play resulting in merger of the order under challenge with
that of the appellate forum, and only the latter would hold the field.
Consequently, it is the decision of the superior court which remains effective,
enforceable, and binding in the eyes of the law, whether the appeal is
dismissed by a speaking order or not.40

40Para 43, State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. Vs. Virendra Bahadur Katheria and Ors.; 2024
INSC 524, dated 15.07.2024.

63
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Whereas, when the special leave to appeal is not granted, the impugned
order of the High Court is not merged with order of the Supreme Court not
granting special leave to appeal in a SLP. In such a case, the order of the
Supreme Court refusing special leave to appeal, does not operate as a res
judicata or constitutes a binding precedent under Article 141 of the
Constitution of India or as the approval of the Supreme Court on the
correctness of the impugned decision of the High Court. Therefore, the order
of the High Court continues to remain operative within the boundaries of the
state, and it would be wrong to consider it as law of the land on the basis of
non-binding order of the Supreme Court refusing to grant special leave to
appeal. In such a case, the High Court can entertain review petition or any
other statutory remedy which may be open to the party.

The following chart illustrates the interplay of doctrine of merger and Art.
136:-

64
SLP MANUAL 2025
 The order refusing to grant special leave to appeal, whether it is a
speaking or a non-speaking order, is non-binding. The Supreme Court while
refusing special leave to appeal in a SLP often use expressions like “heard and
dismissed”, “dismissed”, “dismissed on merits” or “dismissed as barred by
time”, but this does not mean that Court has passed a binding order. The
Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of
Kerala and Another; (2000) 6 SCC 359, authoritatively held as follows: -

“The expression often employed by this Court while disposing of

such petitions are - "heard and dismissed", "dismissed",
"dismissed as barred by time" and so on. May be that at the
admission stage itself the opposite party appears on caveat or on
notice and offers contest to the maintainability of the petition.
The Court may apply its mind to the merit worthiness of the
petitioner's prayer seeking leave to file an appeal and having
formed an opinion may say "dismissed on merits". Such an order
may be passed even ex-parte, that is, in the absence of the
opposite party. In any case, the dismissal would remain a
dismissal by a non-speaking order where no reasons have been
assigned and no law has been declared by the Supreme Court.
The dismissal is not of the appeal but of the special leave
petition. Even if the merits have been gone into, they are the
merits of the special leave petition only. In our opinion neither
doctrine of merger nor Article 141 of the Constitution is attracted
to such an order.”

However, the Supreme Court has clarified that “if the order refusing leave
to appeal is a speaking order, i.e., gives reasons for refusing the grant of leave,
then the order has two implications. Firstly, the statement of law contained in
the order is a declaration of law by the Supreme Court within the meaning of
Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Secondly, other than the declaration of
law, whatever is stated in the order are the findings recorded by the Supreme
Court which would bind the parties thereto and also the court, tribunal or
authority in any proceedings subsequent thereto by way of judicial discipline,
the Supreme Court being the apex court of the country. But this does not amount
to saying that the order of the court, tribunal or authority below has stood
merged in the order of the Supreme Court rejecting special leave petition or that
the order of the Supreme Court is the only order binding as res judicata in

65
SLP MANUAL 2025
subsequent proceedings between the parties,”41 which means that the order of
the High Court cannot be construed as the law of the land and it is open for
the aggrieved party to pursue any statutory remedy which may be open to the
party to challenge the decision of the High Court, for instance, the party may
invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India or move a petition for review in the High Court.

Thus, as long as the Supreme Court does not grant special leave to appeal
in a SLP, any order of the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking,
cannot be construed as binding law of the land, and the order of the High
Court does not get merged with the order of the Supreme Court. However, if
the order of the High Court has been obtained by the party by practising fraud
on the Court, then such fraud shall operate as an exception to the application
of doctrine of merger.42

8. Role of Court Fees

The court fee is a mandatory charge levied on litigants for filing various legal
documents, including a Special Leave Petition (SLP), in courts. It plays a
critical role in the judicial process, as it not only serves as a source of revenue
for the judiciary but is also designed to strike a balance between accessibility
and discouraging frivolous litigation.

The process of calculating and submitting the requisite court fee can be time-
consuming, often taking up several days within the limited timeframe allowed
for filing an SLP. This procedural requirement underscores the importance of
proper planning and prompt action to ensure timely processing of the payment
of Court fees.

41 Para 44, Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of Kerala and Another; (2000) 6 SCC 359.
42 A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, (2007) 4 SCC 221.

66
SLP MANUAL 2025
8.1. Process of payment of court fee for SLP

The structured process of payment of Court fees for filing of SLP is discussed
herein below:

i. Once the approval of Member(A&J) and the ASG is received for filing of
SLP in a case, the panel drafting counsels of the Central Agency Section
(CAS) prepare the draft SLP petition. When the draft SLP petition is sent
to the Supreme Court Cell (SCC) in the Directorate for vetting, it is
accompanied by a demand letter for the court fee to be paid in each
case.
ii. The SCC forwards this demand letter to the ITO Admin and DDO in the
Directorate for further processing.
iii. The DDO (L&R) prepares a bill against the demand letter received which
is further sent to the Zonal Accounts Office (ZAO). The ZAO processes
the payment through RTGS to the authorized company (currently Stock
Holding Corporation of India Limited (SHCIL)) and a Unique Transaction
Reference (UTR) Number is generated which is shared with the DDO
(L&R).
iv. The DDO (L&R) communicates the details of the UTR with the SCC. The
office of the ITO SCC submits the UTR details to the authorized
stockholding company which verifies the receipt of Court Fees and
thereafter handsover an e-stamp against the same to the ITO SCC. The
e-stamp is sent by the SCC to the Advocate on Record (AOR) in CAS for
filing of SLP which completes the process of payment of court fees.

Copy of an e-stamp is given below for illustrative purposes:

67
SLP MANUAL 2025
8.2. Timeline for payment of Court Fees

Previously, the process of payment of Court Fees in the Directorate typically

consumed 10–15 days, primarily due to delays in receiving the Demand Letter
from the Central Agency Section (CAS). Under the earlier process, CAS issued
the Demand Letter only after the vetted draft Special Leave Petition (SLP) was
finalized and shared with them, resulting in significant delays. To address this
issue, the Directorate, in consultation with the Advocate on Record in CAS,
implemented procedural changes to reduce the time taken at this stage. CAS
has now agreed to issue the Demand Letter for Court Fees simultaneously
with the draft SLP petition sent to the Directorate for vetting. This change
enables parallel processing of vetting and payment procedures, thereby
optimizing time utilization.

68
SLP MANUAL 2025
Further the Supreme Court Cell in the Directorate has introduced a daily
tracking mechanism. It compiles a daily list of all draft SLP petitions received
from CAS for vetting and shares this consolidated list with CAS to facilitate
the collection of Demand Letters in bulk for all cases.

These initiatives of the Directorate have successfully reduced the processing

time for Court Fees payments by 5–6 days, ensuring better adherence to filing
deadlines.

8.3. Quantum of Court Fee (as on Jan. 2025)

The amount of court fee payable for filing of SLP in each case is Rs. 5330/-. A
breakup of this amount is given hereinbelow:43
• Fee for petition for special leave to appeal- Rs. 5000/-
• Every application to the court by notice of motion where an ad-interim
ex-parte order is prayed for (stay)- Rs. 200/-
• Every application to the court not specially provided for (Delay)- Rs.
100/-
• Vakalatnama- Rs.10/-
• Every affidavit affirmed or sworn- Rs. 20/-

In cases where request for exemption from filing of certified copy of High Court
order is made an additional Rs. 100/- is payable and the amount of court fee
becomes Rs. 5,430/-

8.4. Ad Valorem Fee Payment

The term Ad valorem in latin means “according to value”. Once the

hearing of the SLP case is listed in the Supreme Court and the Hon’ble Court
finds a case fit and leave is granted by the Supreme Court, an ad valorem fee

43Part II- Appellate Jurisdiction and Part III – Miscellaneous, Third Schedule, The Supreme
Court Rules, 2013

69
SLP MANUAL 2025
is charged in such cases by the Court on the petitioner(s). It refers to a fee
calculated based on the value of a property, transaction, or lawsuit. The
calculation of this fee varies depending on the financial value or tax effect of
the subject matter involved in the case.

• Determining the Quantum of Ad Valorem Fee44 (as on Jan.

2025)

An Ad Valorem Fee at `after notice' stage is quantified as per below criteria-

i. where the tax effect of the subject matter does not exceed Rs. 1 Lakh
then court fee of Rs. 5,000/- will be payable;
ii. where the tax effect of the subject matter exceeds Rs. 1 lakh but does
not exceed Rs. 20 Lakhs, the court fee at Rs. 1,000/- will be payable
for every Rs. 50 Thousand (in excess of Rs. 1 Lakh) till the value
reaches Rs. 20 Lakhs;
iii. where the tax effect is more than Rs. 20 Lakhs, court fee of Rs.
1,000/- will be payable for every Rs.1 Lakh more and above Rs.20
Lakhs.
Provided -
• The maximum fee payable in any case shall not exceed
25,00,000/-
• That where an appeal is brought by special leave granted by the
Court or where notice issued in the Special Leave Petition by the
Court, credit shall be given to the appellant/petitioner, as the case
may be, for the amount of court-fee paid by him at the time of
institution of SLP/Notice and no more court fee will be charged
even if leave is subsequently granted in 'after notice' matter and
the petitioner is converted into an appeal.
• In case where it is not possible to estimate at a money value the
subject-matter in dispute. - 5,000/-

44 Third Schedule, Table of Court Fees Part II Page No. 64

70
SLP MANUAL 2025
Once the fee is determined, it is communicated to the Advocate on Record
(AOR) responsible for the case. The AOR then conveys the fee demand to
the petitioner via a demand letter, accompanied by an affidavit
containing the details of quantum of fee as per tax effect.

The Ad Valorem fee is intended to cover the costs associated with processing
and hearing the appeal. By linking the fee to the value of the subject matter,
the Supreme Court aims to ensure that petitioners with higher-stakes cases
contribute accordingly to the court's resources.

8.5. Caveat Fee:

A Caveat petition is a precautionary measure filed by the Revenue in the

Supreme Court to ensure that no ex-parte order is passed against them in
income tax matters. The Revenue files a Caveat petition in the Supreme Court,
usually when they anticipate that the taxpayer may file a Special Leave
Petition (SLP) or any other petition. Lodging of Caveat petition fee is Rs. 500/-
each case before the Supreme Court.

Once a Caveat petition is filed, the Supreme Court registers it and notifies the
Caveator (the Revenue herein) whenever any petition is filed by the taxpayer.
The Court then provides an opportunity to the Revenue to respond to the
taxpayer's petition.

8.6. Transfer Petition Fee

A Transfer Petition is filed in the Supreme Court by the Revenue in income tax
matters when the Court deems it fit and proper to transfer cases from different
High Courts to itself for a unified decision. The Supreme Court may consider

71
SLP MANUAL 2025
transferring cases45 where cases involving the same or substantially the same
questions of law are either-
• pending before the Supreme Court; and
• one or more High Courts; or
• before two or more High Courts
The primary purpose of a Transfer Petition is to consolidate similar cases
pending in different High Courts and have them decided together by the
Supreme Court, ensuring consistency and clarity in the interpretation of tax
laws. The fee for filing Transfer Petition is Rs. 2,500/- for each case.46

8.7. Monetary impact on tagged SLP(s) due to dismissal of the

lead matter on account of insufficiency of the case:

When the revenue department files a large number of tagged cases in the
Supreme Court through Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and loses due to
insufficiency in the case, the monetary impact can be significant:

a) Court Fees: The revenue department will have to pay substantial court
fees for each SLP filed. If the cases are dismissed or ruled against the
revenue, this can result in significant financial losses, especially in cases
where the department files multiple SLPs in tagged matters. While the
court fee itself may not be recoverable, it still represents a direct cost to
the government.
b) Costs Imposed by the Court: If the Supreme Court imposes costs on the
losing party (in this case, the revenue), the department may have to pay

45Article 139A of the Constitution of India

46SI. No. 9(i) “Transfer Petitions other than the petitions arising out of Matrimonial Disputes”,
Table of Court Fees, Part II, Third Schedule, The Supreme Court Rules, 2013

72
SLP MANUAL 2025
 those costs. These can be considerable, depending on the complexity and
scale of the case.
c) Interest and Penalties: If the SLPs concern issues of taxation or financial
disputes, the revenue’s loss could lead to the reversal of tax assessments,
requiring refunds or reduced tax collections, which may also trigger
interest payments or penalties in cases of over-assessment.

Court fees in SLP filings serve as a crucial mechanism to balance

accessibility and judicial efficiency. Timely processing of court fees is
crucial to ensuring the smooth progression of legal proceedings,
particularly in matters involving the filing of an SLP, where strict timelines
are prescribed. Delays in addressing this procedural requirement can lead
to missed deadlines, thereby jeopardizing the litigant’s opportunity to seek
judicial redress. Thus, careful planning and prompt action in processing
court fees are essential to uphold procedural integrity and safeguard the
litigant’s interests.

9. Litigation Management Tools and Portals

Recognizing the growing challenges posed by an increasing caseload and
procedural delays in the Indian judiciary system, the Supreme Court of
India has consistently underscored the importance of adopting
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to enhance the
efficiency, accessibility, and transparency of litigation management. By
integrating advanced ICT initiatives such as Virtual Hearing, paperless
courts through eCourts and efiling etc., the judiciary seeks to modernize
its processes, make the judicial system more responsive and inclusive in
delivery of justice.

9.1. Live streaming47

47 The Supreme Court of India in Swapnil Tripathi v. Union of India, has advocated live
telecasting of the court proceedings.

73
SLP MANUAL 2025
 The Live Streaming facility came in the wake of COVID-19 but the same
has now become an inseparable part of justice delivery mechanism.

Under the guidance of eCommittee, Supreme Court of India, a sub-

committee was constituted for framing Model Rules48 for Live
Streaming.49 While Phase-I and Phase-II have already been undertaken,
the present developments, including Live-Streaming are taking place
under a planned Phase-III of the e-Courts Project, E-Committee of the
Supreme Court of India. By adopting live streaming and record of
proceedings, the Supreme Court of India would in essence realise its
status of being a ‘Court of Record’.50

Standard Operating Procedure based on Model Rules for Live

Streaming and Record of Court proceedings:

The live proceedings taking place in various Courts of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court can be accessed via a link which is provided from the
Supreme Court Registrar’s office. Only parties concerned can access the
link.

The Supreme Court of India will soon begin live streaming all regular
cases daily. Presently, only Constitution Bench matters and select cases
of public significance from the Chief Justice’s Court are streamed. The
process is now in the final testing phase, and soon, all SC courtrooms
will broadcast their cases on a daily basis.

There are various rules which one needs to take caution while appearing
or even viewing the live proceedings. The same have been made explicit

48 Available at: https://ecommitteesci.gov.in/document/model-rules-for-live-streaming-and-

recording-of-court-proceedings/
49 Developments with respect to harnessing the benefits of the modern ICT’s are undertaken

by the e-Committee of the Hon’ble Supreme Court which was established in 2004 via an order
of the Ministry of Law and Justice in pursuance of a proposal received from the then Chief
Justice of India.
50 Article 129 of the Constitution of India: Supreme Court to be a court of record

The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court
including the power to punish for contempt of itself.

74
SLP MANUAL 2025
 vide “The Model Rules for Live Streaming and Record of
Proceedings”51.

Recording of Proceedings:

With respect to storage and access of recording of proceedings the rules

detail out the following:
• The recordings will be archived and may be uploaded to the
Court's website or other platforms as directed.
• Access to non-uploaded recordings requires approval from the
designated officer, following legal procedures. Requests for copies
must be made using the prescribed form in Schedule III.
• Generally, archived data will be kept for at least six months, unless
the bench directs otherwise. The Chief Justice may issue
guidelines on retention periods. Archived data will be securely
stored in encrypted electronic form with a specific hash value.
With respect to matters concerning where no express provision is made
in these rules, the same shall be decided by the Court in consistency
with the principle of furthering the interest of justice.

9.2.Neutral Citation

The Supreme Court of India launched the Neutral Citation System on July 6,
2023. The Neutral Citation System is a new and innovative mechanism
introduced by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for citing judgments based on a
uniform, reliable and secure methodology.
The implementation of the same is done in order to reduce time spent in
searching for judgments and for ensuring uniformity while citing the same
before various forums.

51[Note: Schedule I read with Rule 5(5)(i) mentions about “Objection to Live Streaming of
Proceedings by filing party” and details out 7 points under which a party can object to
broadcast of live proceedings]

75
SLP MANUAL 2025
(Available at: https://www.sci.gov.in/neutral-citation)

Benefits of Neutral Citation versus the old citation methodology:

• Judicial decisions/Judgments have a bearing on Rule of Law as they
aid in enhancing transparency, accessibility and public scrutiny.
• Access to Neutral citation would be free of cost as opposed to
Subscription only mode of Private Law Reporters in the past.
• Furthermore, it aids in bringing much needed uniformity as the 'Neutral
Citation' would be a Court's approved system of citation, which would
be independent of the series of the Law Reports or other publications,
and unique to each decision.
• Every order and judgment (reportable and non-reportable) of the
Supreme Court of India would have a citation of its own, facilitating easy
identification, referencing and retrieval thereof.

Citation system prior to Neutral Citation

Prior to implementing the Neutral Citation System Indian courts were facing
challenges with the pattern of citing decisions and orders passed by various
High Courts (HCs) and the Supreme Court (the SC).

76
SLP MANUAL 2025
Most of the databases, journals, and law reports published by the publication
house cover only “Reportable52” orders and judgment passed by the HCs and
the SC.
The issue arises when one has to cite certain “non-Reportable53” orders and
judgment passed by the HCs and the SC. The issue of lack of consistency in
methodology while citing the orders raises a serious concern before the courts
while identifying the cited orders of HCs and the SC.
Table 1 below refers to the old method of citing the non-reportable orders and
judgments before the courts:

Comparison of TAXMANN vs. Neutral Citation System

S. Case Name Old method of citing Neutral Citation
No. orders/judgments System
1. Union of India & [2022] 138 2022 INSC 510
Ors. v. Ashish taxmann.com 64
Agarwal
2. PCIT v. Abhisar [2023] 149 2023 INSC 417
Buildwell (P.) Ltd taxmann.com 399 (SC)

Table 2(see below): Comparison of old styled SCR citation as well as the newly
introduced Neutral Citation are illustrated here as under:

SCR Citation vs. Neutral Citation:

S.No Case Number Cause Title Date of SCR Neutral
Disposal Citation Citation
1. CIVIL COMMISSION 1950-05- [1950] 1 1950
APPEAL/68/1949 ER OF 04 335 390 INSC 6
INCOME-TAX,
BOMBAY Vs
AHMEDBHAI

52 Reportable judgments are significant and important for establishing or clarifying legal
principles. These judgments set new precedents or contribute significantly to the
interpretation of existing laws.
53 These judgments typically address routine matters or minor procedural issues. They lack

the transformative impact like that of reportable judgments and are often limited to the
specific facts of the case at hand.

77
SLP MANUAL 2025
 UMARBHAI &
CO., BOMBAY.
2. CIVIL COMMISSION 2013-10- [2013] 2013
APPEAL/125/201 ER OF 08 10 490 INSC
3 INCOME TAX 503 689
Vs M/S EXCEL
INDUSTRIES
LTD.
3. CIVIL GKN 2002-11- [2002] 2002
APPEAL/7731/20 DRIVESHAFTS 25 SUPP. 4 INSC
02 (INDIA) LTD. 359 360 494
Vs INCOME
TAX OFFICER
AND ORS.
4. CIVIL MAK DATA P. 2013-10- [2013] 2013
APPEAL/9772/20 LTD. Vs 30 10 570 INSC
13 COMMISSION 578 735
ER OF
INCOME TAX-
II
5. CIVIL PRICE 2012-09- [2012] 8 2012
APPEAL/6924/20 WATERHOUSE 25 849 857 INSC
12 COOPERS 422
PVT. LTD. Vs
COMMISSION
ER OF
INCOME TAX,
KOLKATA1
AND ANR.

The former Hon’ble Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, introduced the
method of neutral citation54 to implement consistency in methodology while
citing the orders of HCs and the SC.
According to the Notice issued by the Supreme Court of India on July 06,
2023, the SC has decided to allocate the Neutral citation in the format –
“2023INSC1”
i. The first four characters 2023 are the YEAR of the pronouncement
of order/judgment;

54Available at:
https://drive.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/06072023105659-
479919.pdf

78
SLP MANUAL 2025
 ii. The abbreviation INSC stands for the SC i.e., India Supreme Court,
and;
iii. Numeric 1 is the seriatim55 number of orders/judgments.

2023 INSC 1
Year of the India Supreme Court seriatim number
pronouncement

Various HCs also publish their orders and judgments bearing a neutral
citation number along with quick response (QR) code on the top left corner of
the page of such orders and judgments.
Screenshots of orders/ judgments passed by various HCs and the SC are
reproduced below:

55Seriatim: in a series; P Ramanatha Aiyar’s, The Major Law Lexicon Vol-5 (S-Z) (4th ed.
2010 pg. 6206).

79
SLP MANUAL 2025
Example – 1

Example – 2

80
SLP MANUAL 2025
Example – 3

81
SLP MANUAL 2025
 Example – 4

The SC provided a tool for the search of orders/judgments through neutral

citation, which can be accessed on their website in the drop-down menu of “e-
Services” by choosing the option of e-SCR.

Citation on the basis of Diary No./Case No. for tax lead cases decided
post-2020:
S. Case Number Case Name Date of Order Neutral
No. citation
1 Diary No. - Abhisar 12.05.2023 2023 INSC
19437/2020 Buildwell 417
C.A. No. 006580
/ 2021

82
SLP MANUAL 2025
 2 Diary No. - Ashish 04.05.2022 2022 INSC
32623/2021 Agarwal 510
C.A. No. 003005
/ 2022
3 Rajeev Bansal 03.10.2024 2024 INSC
Diary No. - 754
12064/2023
C.A. No. 008629
/ 2024

9.3. eSCR
The eSCR or electronic Supreme Court Report is a Judgment Search
Portal which serves as a comprehensive database of rulings issued by High
Courts across the country. It is designed to assist users in finding relevant
judgments based on specific needs.

A key feature of the portal is its free-text search engine, which retrieves
judgments based on keywords entered into the search box. Additional filtering
options include selecting criteria such as the High Court, Act, Sections, names
of parties, the Hon'ble judge, and judgment date. Users can apply any
combination of these filters to refine their search results. The integrated
filtering feature further enhances the search process by allowing additional
refinements to the available results.

Key Features of eSCR

• eSCR is the only official law report in India under The Indian Law Reports
Act 1875.
• eSCR is the only Law Journal where the head notes of the judgments are
approved by the Honorable judges themselves who delivered the
judgments.

83
SLP MANUAL 2025
• Previously, it was available on cost for physical copies which were made
available by the Supreme Court but now it is made free of cost and in a
digitized format.

Working of eSCR

• The stakeholders can access eSCR in multiple places one is from the main
Supreme Court website and also it is also made available in the Judgment
search portal which has nearly one crore judgments of all the high courts.
Apart from the above mentioned methods, there is also eSCR link which is
produced below:
https://judgments.ecourts.gov.in/pdfsearch/
So, after opening the eSCR link, the website is a simple interface, showing the
option to search with “Keyword”. Even if one does not enter any keyword and
just enters Captcha, all the Supreme Court judgments uploaded are displayed.

The first method of retrieving a judgment is by searching via strength of the

Bench. Upon entering the website without entering any particular keyword,
one can see on the right side of web page, under “Related Topics” section,
quorum wise (strength of Bench) judgments can be culled out. For example,
there is only one 13 judge Bench judgment that has been delivered in India
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshavananda Bharti. The same
can be seen in the image illustrated below:

84
SLP MANUAL 2025
 (Quorum-wise list: see above)

Upon selection of a particular Bench strength, the list of cases pertaining to

the chosen strength is displayed. Any judgment from the list of cases can be
selected, which opens up a separate pop-up window of a PDF file. The same
can be downloaded free of cost.

Second option pertains to seeing judgments delivered by particular Judge/s.

One can also choose the search functionality upon selection of Judges option
and search for a particular Judge. Upon selection of a particular Judge, he
total number of judgments are listed which can be accessed upon clicking
them.
85
SLP MANUAL 2025
For illustration purposes:

(Judge wise: see above)

The third method to retrieve a particular judgment is via citation. So, if one is
aware about the year mentioned in the citation, they can access it via clicking
on the Citation Year option and select the desired citation year. Upon
selecting a particular year, volume wise judgment can be accessed. (see below)

86
SLP MANUAL 2025
Tabs/Options available on the website pane to access and retrieve
judgments:

Furthermore, the selection tab contains searching via Judge, Act/Section,

Decision Date,

Typing a Judge’s name would result in producing all the judgments pertaining
to that Judge.

Similarly, in the Act/Section selection option, typing a particular act or a

section of an Act would result in a drop down menu displaying the act
searched for and all the judgments pertaining to the Act.

Similarly, if one is aware about the date of judgment, they can also choose to
search the same by choosing the Decision Date option.
(see below)

87
SLP MANUAL 2025
Lastly, if one has the complete eSCR citation, the eSCR method of retrieving
the judgment can be selected. One needs to enter either the citation
year/volume, neutral citation, Case Type/Case No/Case Year, Party Name or
any Keywords pertaining to the Judgment.

9.4.Video Conference Hearing

Video conferencing hearings in the Supreme Court of India allow cases to

be heard remotely, without requiring the physical presence of the litigants,
lawyers, or judges in the courtroom. This practice began during the COVID-
19 pandemic when in-person court proceedings posed health risks, but it has
continued as a way to improve accessibility, efficiency, and speed of justice
delivery.

Since the start of the lockdown, the Supreme Court conducted 7,54,443
hearings via video conferencing up to 04.06.2024. To standardize and unify
VC proceedings, the Supreme Court issued an order on 6th April 2020,
granting legal recognition to video conferencing hearings. Additionally, a five-
judge committee established VC rules, which were then shared with all High
Courts to adapt as needed for local contexts. A total of 28 High Courts have
adopted these video conferencing rules.

88
SLP MANUAL 2025
In order to join the Video-Conferencing, a set of Standard Operating Rules
have been framed.56

Instructions for Joining Video/Tele-Conferencing for Registrar

Interaction:

1. The Party-in-Person must specify whether they will join the video-
conference via their own desktop/laptop or prefer to use the Supreme
Court’s facilities. The web link will be sent to the petitioner’s registered
email or mobile number. Requests for the link should be emailed to the
relevant Registrar/Judicial Branch.

2. Requests for the link should be submitted by 2 PM on the day before

the hearing.

3. Parties are advised that desktop/laptop/tablet devices offer stable

connectivity for video-conferencing, while mobile devices may experience
disruptions due to signal drops or incoming calls.

Instructions for Video/Tele-Conferencing Interaction with the Registrar:

1. The Registry will send the invitation link for appearance or viewing via
SMS, email, or WhatsApp to the provided mobile number/email one day
before the hearing. The link should not be shared or forwarded to others.

2. The party must click on the provided link (preferably on a computer or

tablet), which will open a window. They must then click "Join Conference."

3. A prompt will appear asking the party to enter their display name (e.g.,
XYZ PARTY-IN-PERSON) before clicking "Join."

4. After clicking "Join," the party will enter the video-conference with the
Registrar.

56 Available at: https://main.sci.gov.in/pdf/LU/11072020_111721.pdf

89
SLP MANUAL 2025
 5. The party must display their ID (e.g., Aadhar, Passport) clearly in front
of the camera for verification.

6. Upon joining, the party should introduce themselves and follow the
Registrar’s instructions. The party must mute their mic when not speaking
and unmute only when required by the Registrar.

7. Parties must maintain appropriate conduct and attire during the video-
conference. Recording, storing, or broadcasting the proceedings is strictly
prohibited.

8. Parties must remain online until the Registrar concludes the

interaction, after which they may disconnect.

9. For any issues connecting, parties may contact the Branch Officer at
the provided PABX number.

10. If there are technical issues, further notice will be sent to the party’s
registered email or SMS.

11. The Party-in-Person must keep their phone available for incoming calls
for tele-conferencing, but it should be kept away from the video-
conferencing device’s mic.

9.5. LIMBS: Legal Information Management & Briefing System

• LIMBS57 has been developed by the Department of Legal Affairs in

association with NIC in order to collate and monitor the litigation
pertaining to the Union of India (UoI) before various Courts/Tribunals
in India.

57 Available at: https://limbs.gov.in/limbs/login

90
SLP MANUAL 2025
• LIMBS aims to provide continuous, round-the-clock monitoring of court
cases, ensuring greater transparency, efficiency, and proactive oversight
throughout the entire litigation process. It seamlessly integrates all the
stakeholders viz. users, nodal officers, advocates, to upload the latest
information which is concurrently available on real time basis on this
single unified platform.

• The LIMBS platform requires entry of litigation data in given fields by

the users of respective Ministries/Departments in respect of the court
cases being dealt by them. Thus, the efficient functioning of LIMBS
requires the users of various Ministries/Departments to regularly
update the details of their court cases on this platform.

• At present, 55 Ministries are utilizing the LIMBS as a tool for efficient

litigation management. Since by virtue of Article 300 of the Constitution
of India, the government (UoI or any State Government) can sue as well
as be sued, it is of utmost importance that litigation pertaining to
Government as a party be dealt with severity and efficiency. LIMBS aids
in apprising the nodal officers and counsels involved in a timely and
unified manner.

91
SLP MANUAL 2025
 CIRCULARS & INSTRUCTIONS

The CBDT frequently issues circulars and instructions to guide, provide

clarity on complex tax issues, introduce new guidelines, establish limits on
matters eligible for appeal, and address anomalies or ambiguities within law.
This chapter details essential CBDT circulars relevant to SLP procedures for
providing effective and efficient tax litigation before the apex court.

CIRCULARS

1. CBDT Circular no. 9 of 2024.(Annexure-C1)

CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 builds upon earlier instructions (Circular
5/2024) and aims to further streamline and rationalize the appeals process
within the Income Tax Department. It further enhances the monetary
thresholds for filing appeals, introduces review mechanisms to prevent
unnecessary litigation, and ensures that only substantial and important
cases are pursued before the ITAT, High Court, or Supreme Court. The
exceptions are provided as mentioned in para 3.1 and 3.2 of the circular
5/2024.

2. CBDT Circular no. 5 of 2024 Monetary Limit.(Annexure- C2)

CBDT Circular No. 5/2024 revised the exception categories for filing appeals
by the Income Tax Department at the ITAT, High Court, and Supreme Court,
aimed at reducing unnecessary litigation, optimizing resource allocation,
and focusing on cases with a significant tax effect. The revised exceptions to
the monetary limits are provided under para 3.1 and 3.2 of the circular.

3. CBDT Circular No. 08/2023 (Annexure-C3)

CBDT Circular No. 8/2023 essentially clarifies the applicability of revised
exceptions and the monetary limits for cases where filing of appeals are
defered under Section 158AB.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM

1. OM Issued by DOLA vide F No.1-28015/01/2009-

Admn.IV(LA) OM (DoLA) (Annexure-C4)
The OM emphasizes the importance of adhering to legal advice provided by
the Department of Legal Affairs, as per the Government of India (Allocation
of Business) Rules, 1961. It reiterates that once the Department offers a
considered opinion on legal or constitutional issues,
Ministries/Departments should follow that advice. If further clarification or
reconsideration is required, it should be done with the approval of the
Secretary of the concerned Ministry/Department.

INSTRUCTIONS

1. CBDT Instruction no. 1 of 2023.(Annexure-C5)

CBDT’s Instruction No. 1 of 2023, issued on August 23, 2023, directs
Assessing Officers (AOs) on implementing the Supreme Court ruling in
Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. This ruling clarifies that for
completed (unabated) assessments, additions cannot be made if no
incriminating material was found during a search. The instruction
provides guidance on handling pending and completed cases,
emphasizing that AOs should only reopen assessments under Section
147/148 if conditions specified by the Supreme Court are met.

2. Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) on filing of

appeals/SLPs by the Income Tax Department in the
Supreme Court and related matters. (Annexure-C6)
CBDT Instruction No. 2/2022 sets a comprehensive framework for the
timely processing and filing of appeals/SLPs in the Supreme Court by
the Income Tax Department. It is in supersession of all earlier
instruction on the subject. The instruction provides a detailed SOP,
including:
 a) Time-bound procedures for processing SLP proposals.
b) A systematic approach through High Court Cells for
tracking and disseminating High Court judgments.
c) Clear responsibilities for Pr. CIT/CIT in ensuring quality
control in the proposals and in timely submission to the
Directorate of L&R.
d) Establishment of a monitoring mechanism to ensure
compliance with timelines and address any delays in the
process.

This instruction aims to streamline the appeal process and enhance

efficiency, ensuring that the Department adheres to strict timelines
and provides a transparent and accountable process for filing appeals
and SLPs in the Supreme Court.

3. CBDT Instruction no. 1 of 2022. (Annexure-C7)

CBDT’s Instruction No. 1 of 2022 guides the implementation of the
Supreme Court's ruling in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022)
concerning reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the
Income Tax Act during April 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021, under the
TOLA relaxation. The Supreme Court directed that these notices be
treated as show cause notices under the revised Section 148A
(introduced by the Finance Act, 2021), with procedural compliance
under amended Sections 147-151. This instruction standardizes the
Supreme Court’s decision across all relevant cases.

4. Instruction No. 7 of 2016 CBDT (Annexure-C8)

To ensure effective representation before High Courts and other
judicial forums, the CBDT has revised the guidelines for engaging
Standing Counsels, superseding Instruction No. 3/2012. Key points
include:
 I. Panel Formation:
a. The engagement process must begin at least
six months before the panel's expiry.
b. Panel size should consider appeal pendency,
with one Senior Counsel handling 450–500
appeals on average.
c. An "extended panel" with a 25% buffer of
additional counsels is required to address
exigencies like resignations or terminations.
Extended panel members are unpaid until
formally empaneled.
II. Proposal Submission:

a. Proposals by Pr. CCIT/CCIT must include:

a) Screening Committee composition.
b) Pendency of appeals.
c) Minutes detailing the selection process.
d) Performance evaluation of existing counsels.
e) Grading and evaluation of the proposed
panel.

III. Engagement Terms:

a. Engagement procedures, qualifications, and

terms are outlined in Annexure-I.
b. Revised fee schedules, effective from
07.09.2016, are detailed in Annexure-II. Fees
prior to this date are payable at old rates, while
revised rates apply thereafter.
IV. Implementation:
o Guidelines have concurrence from the MoL&J and
the Department of Expenditure.
ANNEXURE C-3
ANNEXURE C-9
ANNEXURE C-10
 ANNEXURE C-18
+ffiq,rflr+rs{ frS
Central Board of Direct Taxes
ymrr qrq'fir qurR?errf,q Fffr qnt wgr.erm;
Directorate of Income Tru< (Legal & Research)
Hs[ TiEqr 401, 4ff {frrf,,qr+ etrrr++, 3G. fi. \rfu,il{ ffi
* 1 10 0 02
Room No.401,4tt Floor, Drum Shaped Building, I.P.Estate, NewDelhi-02
ffi[WISqtI
TEL: 01 1 -23379424 E-mail: dsit.lr@,incometax.sov.in

F. No. PT.DGIT(L&R)/HQ/Proforma BI2OZL-22 Date: L7l0Ll2O22

To,

All Pr. Chief Commissioners of Income Tax

Sir/Madam,

Sub: Revised Proforma B for submission of proposal to file SLP before Supreme
Court-regarding.
The CBDT has issued instructions and directions from time to time with emphasis on
timely filing of Appeals/SlPs before the Supreme Court. With a view to streamline the
process of filing the SLP and to minimize the deficiencies in the proposals from the field, the
CBDT has revised the Proforma'B'for submisslon of proposal to file SLP.

The undersigned is directed to forward the revised Proforma'B', for compliance.

Yours' faithfully

($anjay Sharma)
JDrr(osDxHQ)(L&R)
New Delhi

Copy to : 1) Member (A&J) for information.

2) Database Cell for uploading on the website.

JDrr(osDxHQ)(L&R)
 Revised Proforma for submission of proposal to file SLP
PROFORMA: B
1. (a) ITA No./WP No. of the Judgment

(b) Unique 16 digit ‘Case Number Record’ (CNR) No.

(c) High Court LIMBS ID

2. Whether there are multiple appeals involved in the order of High Court. Y/N

If yes:-

(a) No. of appeals involved in the composite order of High Court

(b) Whether SLP is proposed against all the appeals involved Y/N

(c) If no, reason for not proposing SLP against all the appeals involved

3. i. Name of the assessee

ii. Address of the assessee

4. (a) Assessment Year 1

(b) Income declared by the assessee in ITR

(c) Income assessed u/s 143(3)/147/153(A)/153C

5. (a) Aggregate of Tax effect on issues to be disputed.

(b) Tax effect Issue wise involved in the SLP proposal.

6. Is the Tax effect below the limits prescribed in instruction on monetary

limits for filling SLP? If yes, please specify the exception provided in
the instruction in which the proposal is covered.

(a) Details of exception clause

(b) Relevant documents (in case of Audit Objection)

7. i. Date of High Court order

ii. Date of Limitation for filing SLP

iii. If proposal to Directorate of Income-tax (L&R) is sent beyond 21 days

from the date of order, reasons for delay.
8. (a) Are the following documents, in one set of hard copy, enclosed

i. Certified copy of High Court's judgment /order Y/N

ii. Copy of memo of Appeal u/s 260A filed before the High Court Y/N

iii. Copy of order of ITAT Y/N

1
Separate Proforma ‘B’ to be filed for each Assessment Year

Page 1 of 3
 iv. Copy of the order of CIT(A) Y/N

v. Copy of the Assessment Order/s Y/N

vi. In case of reopening u/s 148 copy of notice, copy of reason recorded
and approval of PCIT, objection filed by assessee and reply of the
objection.

vii. if, any documents are relied upon/referred into for proposing SLP,
copy of the same

viii. (a) Any other relevant documents

(b) The soft copy of the documents is sent in CD as well as through Y/N
email.

9. (i) Facts of the case in brief (in about 300 words) : In the
separate
sheet

(ii). Information regarding SQsL before the High Court.

Sr. Substantial Decision of Relevant Whether the Remarks,

No. Question of High Court Para of the SQL is if any
Law(SQL) on the SQL High Court sought to be
raised before (held in order agitated
the High favour or before the
Court against the Supreme
Revenue) Court
(Yes/No)
1.
2.
…

(iii) Whether all the question of law (QoL) raised before High Court
have been answered in the order of High Court. If no proposed
action for the same.

(iv) Whether the issue of perversity has been taken as a ground

before ITAT/HC. If yes please indicate the relevant para of the
order of CIT(A)/ITAT/HC.

(v) If the disputed issue under consideration is involved in other

assessment years, then assessment year wise status of litigation
in all such appeals

10. The ‘Substantial Questions of Law to be proposed in the SLP’

11. (a) If the judgment, to be contested, has relied upon another judgment,
then a copy of the relied upon judgment & its present status of litigation,
if ascertained.

(b) Has the relied upon judgment been accepted on merits or has not
been accepted but not contested further on account of tax effect being

Page 2 of 3
 less than the limit prescribed by the Board.

[The information relating to status of the relied upon judgment as

indicated in (a) & (b) may be mentioned in the note to be enclosed as per
Sl. No. 8(viii) above]

12. (i) Name and present communicable address of all the respondents
against whom SLP is sought to be filed

(ii) E-mail addresses of all respondents

13. Communication details of PCIT/CIT

(i) Name

(ii) Telephone Number

(iii) Fax number

(iv) Mobile number

(v) Official E-mail id

14. Specific comments of the CCIT for recommending SLP to be separately

enclosed with the proposal for consideration of Board

Date : Signature
Place : Name & designation of the PCIT/CIT

Notes:-
1. In case of writ petitions, copy of writ petition, copy of counter & rejoinder affidavits filed
in the High Court and any other document crucial to the adjudication of issue.

2. The delay due to time taken in ascertaining the present status would be attributable to
the PCIT/CIT forwarding proposal without the same as this is very crucial to proceed
further.

3. The PCIT/CIT has to ensure that every page of the annexure is legible

Page 3 of 3
XURE C-19
 EXHIBIT-1

PROFORMA B-1

PROFORMA FOR CASES WHERE APPEAL/ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NOT

RECOMMENDED

S. Contents Input Comments

No. by
field
1. (a) Jurisdictional High Court Information as per records.
(b) ITA No./WP No. of the Information as per records.
judgment
(c) High Court Order Date Information as per records.
2. i. Name and PAN of the Information as per records.
assessee
ii. Address of the assessee Information as per records.
3. (a) Assessment Year Assessment year(s) for which the
Hon’ble High Court has passed the
impugned judgment.
(b) Aggregate of Tax effect on The total/ estimated amount of
issues to be disputed. tax involved is to be mentioned.

(c) Tax effect (Issue wise) The information in column 3(b) is

aggregate. However, in this
column, the figure of tax effect
w.r.t. to each issue is to be
provided.
9. (a) Facts of the case in brief The relevant facts are to be
(in about 300 words): mentioned in this column
(Separate Sheet may be (separate sheet to be enclosed, if
attached as annexure) required).
 (b) Information regarding The information regarding all the
SQsL before the High Court. SQL that arose before the High
Court, and the decision of the
Sr. Substantial Decisio High Court on those SQLs is to be
No. Question of n of mentioned in the tabular format.
Law (SQL) High
raised Court
before the on the
High Court SQL
1.

2.
10. Reason for not proposing The field authorities are required
Appeal/ SLP against HC to clearly identify the reason for
Order (please tick the not proposing SLP before the
relevant clause): Supreme Court, i.e. as per the
below mentioned 4 sub-heads. If
the SLP is not proposed in regard
to any other reasoning, the field
authorities are required to provide
such reasoning.
(a) Tax effect below monetary In this case, though the decision
limit and not covered by an of the Hon’ble High Court is not
exception accepted but since the tax effect is
below monetary limit and is not
covered by any exception under
Para 3 of the Circular No. 5/2024,
the filing of the SLP is not
recommended by the field
formation.
 (b) Tax effect below monetary In this scenario, though the tax
limit and covered by effect is low but it is covered under
exception in para 8 of the the exception in Para 3 of the
CBDT Circular, but HC order Circular 5/2024. But since the
accepted on merit order of the High Court is
accepted on merit, the SLP is not
recommended.

[Note: Para 8 of Circular 3/2018,

mentioned in this column, is to be
read as Para 3 of the Circular
5/2024 as Circular 5/2024 has
superseded Circular 3/2018]
(c) Tax effect below monetary Para 10 of Circular 3/2018,
limit and covered by mentioned in this column, is to be
exception in para 10 of the read as Para 3 of the Circular
CBDT Circular, but HC order 5/2024 as Circular 5/2024 has
accepted on merit superseded Circular 8/2018.

(d) Tax effect above monetary In this case, the tax effect is above
limit, but HC order accepted the monetary limit but the order is
on merit accepted on merits by the field
formation.
13. Communication details of Information as per records.
PCIT/CIT
(i) Name Information as per records.
(ii) Telephone Number/ Information as per records.
Mobile number
(iii) Official E-mail ID Information as per records.

Date: Pr. Commissioner/ Commissioner of

Place: Income Tax
 EXHIBIT-2

LEGAL AND RESEARCH TRACKING SYSTEM (LRTS)

The Directorate of L&R manages an in-house database system called

the Legal and Research Tracking System (LRTS), designed to maintain a
comprehensive record of all Special Leave Petition (SLP) proposals received
by the Directorate, along with their outcomes. This system serves as a
centralized reference point for processing on going SLP cases, enabling
officers to verify the status of filings on similar matters and ensuring
consistency in decision-making.

LRTS also facilitates detailed legal analysis by providing access to

case-specific comments from all relevant authorities, including law officers
of the Ministry of Law and Justice. This ensures that recommendations on
SLP proposals are well-informed and thoroughly vetted. Furthermore, the
system is regularly updated to incorporate new functionalities, enhancing its
utility and efficiency for the Directorate’s operations.
 EXHIBIT-3

JURISDICTIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court, hierarchically, is the highest constitutional court of

India, and the Constitution of India equips the Supreme Court with the
following jurisdictions: -

(a) Original Jurisdiction (Art. 131)- the exclusive original jurisdiction of

the Supreme Court bars any court other than the Supreme Court to
adjudicate certain disputes between, the Centre and a State; the Centre
and a State on one side, and a State on the other side; and two or more
States. The original jurisdiction of the Court is not invoked by the
Income Tax Department.

(b) Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (Art. 134)- the Supreme Court in

exercise of its criminal appellate jurisdiction is empowered to adjudicate
any judgment, final order or sentence of a High Court in a criminal
proceeding if the High Court has, on appeal reversed and order of
acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death.

(c) Writ Jurisdiction (Art. 32)- for the purpose of enforcement of

Fundamental Rights conferred on the citizens and non-citizens under
Part III of the Constitution the Supreme Court has power to issue writs
in the nature of Habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto
and certiorari. The Income Tax Department being the State cannot
invoke the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. However, the assessee
may invoke it, if the assessee successfully establishes that a tax imposed
by the law infringes any of the fundamental rights.

(d) Power to do Complete Justice (Article 142(1)) - the Supreme Court

has very wide powers to do complete justice in any case before it. The
Court exercises this extraordinary jurisdiction, with much care and
caution, to deal with any exceptional situation in the larger public
interest or any situations which cannot be effectively and appropriately
tackled by the existing legal provisions. The Court in this extraordinary
 jurisdiction can by-pass any statutory provision, if any case so demands,
to secure the ends of justice and uphold rule of law. Lately, the Court
had invoked its power to do complete justice in the taxation case of
Union of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal, [2022] 138 taxmann.com 64, wherein
the court, as a one-time measure by invoking the Article 142 power, held
that the Notices issued by the Revenue under the unamended S.148 of
the Income Tax Act, 1961, shall be deemed to be issued under the newly
inserted S. 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (inserted by the Finance
Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021).

(e) Contempt jurisdiction (Art. 129)- the Supreme Court has power to
punish for its civil contempt if there is wilful disobedience or non-
compliance of the Court’s order, and to punish for its criminal contempt
if disparaging remarks are made about the judges or there is an
interference with the course of justice. If there is a non-compliance with
the order of the Court by the Income Tax Department, then civil
contempt may be invoked against it.

(f) Civil Appeal and Certificate for Appeal (Art. 133 and 134A)- the
Supreme Court is the final court of appeal. An appeal is maintainable
from any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of a High
Court, if the High Court by issue of a certificate of appeal certifies that
the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and
that, in the opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be
decided by the Supreme Court.

The maintainability of a civil appeal rests on the issue of certificate of

appeal to the Supreme Court by the concerned High Court, and thus an
aggrieved party cannot prefer a civil appeal to the Supreme Court as a
matter of right without the grant of certificate for appeal. Under Article
134A the High Court has discretion to grant certificate for appeal, either
on its own motion or on an oral application made by or on behalf of the
aggrieved party, immediately after the passing of the judgement.
 Thereafter, the High Court may decide, as soon as may be whether a
certificate of appeal may be given in that case for preferring an appeal to
the Supreme Court.

The certificate for appeal is not granted as a matter of course,

otherwise there is a possibility that the Supreme Court may be converted
into an ordinary court of further appeal. Thus, the certificate for appeal
is only issued when the High Court is satisfied about the conditions
mentioned in Article 133(1), i.e., the case involves a substantial question
of law of general importance and the same is to be decided by the
Supreme Court. The petition of appeal under Article 133 is to be
presented in the Supreme Court within 60 days from the grant of
certificate for appeal by the High Court1.

(g) Special Leave Petition (Art. 136(1)- the Supreme Court, exercises its
discretionary extra-ordinary appellate jurisdiction to adjudicate an
appeal by special leave from any judgment, decree, determination,
sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or
tribunal in the territory of India. The court in its discretion grants
special leave for hearing appeal against any kind of judgment of a court
or a tribunal.

Under Article 136 the Supreme Court can operate beyond the
limitations and conditions contained in Article 133. The Supreme Court,
can hear appeals not only from the High Courts but also from other
adjudicatory authorities like the tribunals or directly from the
subordinate courts if the situation necessitates bypassing usual
procedure of filing appeal in the High Court.
Unlike, under Article 133, there is no requirement of obtaining a
certificate for appeal from the High Court for preferring an appeal under
Article 136 in the Supreme Court, thus the appellant is not bound by the
opinion of the High Court on whether the appeal before the Supreme

1 Order XIX Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

 Court is maintainable or not. Even if there is a refusal on the part of the
High Court to grant certificate for appeal under Article 133, appeal can
be heard under Article 136.

An SLP is maintainable even against the order of a court or tribunal which

the statute declares as final, which would not be appealable under Article
133 jurisdiction. Even where a statute does not provide for appeal, the
Supreme Court may hear such an appeal under Article 136. However, it
would be wrong to interpret that Article 136 confers a right to prefer an
appeal on a person, it merely bestows the Supreme Court with a plenary
discretion to grant special leave for hearing an appeal.
DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (LEGAL & RESEARCH)
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES