https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279523 The Karnataka HC noted that the condonation of delay issue was treated as a question of fact and did not, on the materials placed, give rise to a substantial question of law. It further held that reliance on a jurisdictional High Court decision stemmed from the main appellate order on merits, against which no separate appeal had been filed. The challenge to the Tribunal's treatment of the affidavit, dismissal of the miscellaneous petition, and permission to withdraw the appeal did not establish any substantial question of law from the impugned order. en-us Wed, 08 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:51:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279523 The Karnataka HC noted that the condonation of delay issue was treated as a question of fact and did not, on the materials placed, give rise to a substantial question of law. It further held that reliance on a jurisdictional High Court decision stemmed from the main appellate order on merits, against which no separate appeal had been filed. The challenge to the Tribunal's treatment of the affidavit, dismissal of the miscellaneous petition, and permission to withdraw the appeal did not establish any substantial question of law from the impugned order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279523