Pendency under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme depends on substance, so an irregularly filed petition can still qualify for relief.

For the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, pendency is determined by whether a proceeding or appeal was in substance instituted and awaiting adjudication, not by technical perfection in presentation. An imperfectly filed writ petition or appeal does not cease to be pending merely because it was returned for compliance, incomplete, irregular, or later found incompetent, so long as it had been brought before the court within the relevant period. Applying this principle, the writ petition was treated as pending on the cutoff date, making the assessee eligible for relief under the scheme. The denial of relief was therefore unsustainable, and the appeals succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition or appeal, though initially imperfectly presented and returned for compliance, could be treated as pending on the relevant cutoff date for relief under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.

Analysis: The scheme under Section 95(i)(c) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 was construed in line with the Supreme Court authorities to mean that pendency is determined by the existence of a case or appeal in substance, and not by technical perfection in presentation. An appeal or proceeding does not cease to be pending merely because it was irregular, incomplete, or later found to be incompetent, so long as it had been instituted and was awaiting adjudication. The Court applied this principle to the facts and held that the writ petition should be regarded as pending for the purpose of the scheme.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to have the matter treated as pending under the scheme, and the denial of relief was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the order of the learned single Judge was set aside, resulting in relief to the assessee under the scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: For the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, pendency is satisfied by a legally instituted appeal or case awaiting decision, even if its presentation is irregular, incomplete, or ultimately held incompetent.

---