Three questions of law were raised by the assessee before the High Court but counsel of the assessee having erroneously contended before the High Court that two substantial questions of law were covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) against the assessee, although this was not so, the High Court considered the third question and disposed of the appeal in its favour.  The assessee and Department accepted the High Court’s decision on that question, the assessee filed an appeal before the Supreme Court seeking an opportunity to make submissions before the High Court on the other two substantial questions of law, or in the alternative, that the Supreme Court hear the appeal on those two substantial questions of law. Supreme Court held that  an opportunity must be given to the assessee to make submissions on those two substantial questions of law and for the purpose of reconsidering whether or not they were covered by the judgment of the court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) against the assessee. Although there was no challenge to the order of the High Court on the ground of there being any error therein, the order had to be set aside as it was a final order of the High Court, so as to enable the appeal to be restored on the file of the High Court.