https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9796 An appeal filed against an order refusing to condone delay was treated as a pending appeal for section 95(i)(c) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, because an appeal with a condonation application retains its appellate character in law. The declarations under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 could therefore not be rejected on the ground that no appeal was pending. The later condonation of delay and restoration of the appeals was also relevant, since subsequent events during the pendency of proceedings could be considered and the allowance of the appeals related back to their filing, validating the declarations and supporting consequential relief. en-us Tue, 25 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9796 An appeal filed against an order refusing to condone delay was treated as a pending appeal for section 95(i)(c) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, because an appeal with a condonation application retains its appellate character in law. The declarations under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 could therefore not be rejected on the ground that no appeal was pending. The later condonation of delay and restoration of the appeals was also relevant, since subsequent events during the pendency of proceedings could be considered and the allowance of the appeals related back to their filing, validating the declarations and supporting consequential relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9796