https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22271 An Income-tax Officer's refusal to condone delay in an application for renewal of a firm's registration was treated as, in substance, a refusal of registration. Because appealability depends on the true legal character and effect of the order, the order was brought within section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, rather than section 184(4). An order refusing registration is appealable under section 246(1)(j), whereas the condonation aspect in section 184(4) is not separately made appealable. The settled principle applied was that substance and effect govern the classification of the order for appeal purposes, so the order was held appealable. en-us Wed, 30 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:51:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22271 An Income-tax Officer's refusal to condone delay in an application for renewal of a firm's registration was treated as, in substance, a refusal of registration. Because appealability depends on the true legal character and effect of the order, the order was brought within section 185(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, rather than section 184(4). An order refusing registration is appealable under section 246(1)(j), whereas the condonation aspect in section 184(4) is not separately made appealable. The settled principle applied was that substance and effect govern the classification of the order for appeal purposes, so the order was held appealable. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22271