https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22500 Appeal maintainability under the Estate Duty Act was construed liberally in relation to the proviso to section 62(1). Although the entire duty had not been paid when the appeal was filed, the accountable person was allowed instalment payment and the full demand was discharged before the appeal was heard. On that factual basis, the technical objection to competence failed, and the Appellate Controller's entertainment of the appeal was treated as condonation of the delay under section 62(2). The objection based on non-payment at filing was rejected, and the appeal was competent to be heard and disposed of. en-us Wed, 14 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:52:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22500 Appeal maintainability under the Estate Duty Act was construed liberally in relation to the proviso to section 62(1). Although the entire duty had not been paid when the appeal was filed, the accountable person was allowed instalment payment and the full demand was discharged before the appeal was heard. On that factual basis, the technical objection to competence failed, and the Appellate Controller's entertainment of the appeal was treated as condonation of the delay under section 62(2). The objection based on non-payment at filing was rejected, and the appeal was competent to be heard and disposed of. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22500