2007 (3) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... between September 1, 1998, and December 31, 1998. (It was stated at the bar that this period was extended for a period of one month, which is not relevant for the purposes of this case.) For becoming entitled to the benefits of the scheme, inter alia, the amount in dispute must be in arrears and an appeal or reference or writ petition in respect of the same must have been admitted and pending before any appellate authority or the High Court or the Supreme Court on the date of filing of the declaration. The petitioners in both original petitions had filed the revision petitions in respect of the amount in dispute for the three assessment years on August 31, 1998. They filed declaration under the scheme on October 14, 1998. It is admitted....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....end that what is relevant for the purpose of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, is pendency of a revision as on the date of filing the declaration and not as on the date of consideration of the declaration for benefit under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme by the authority competent to pass orders under the scheme. In view of the abovesaid decisions, it is settled law that what is relevant for the purpose of the scheme is pendency of the revisions as on the date of declaration made by the petitioners under the scheme. Admittedly, the declarations were made on October 14, 1998, and the revisions were pending at that time, the same having been filed on August 27, 1998. That being so, the fact that the revisions were later dismissed on Novem....