2000 (1) TMI 63

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent per : Bhaskar Rao, C.J.]. - These writ appeals are filed assailing the order dismissing the writ petition. 2.The brief facts of the case are Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short 'the Scheme') was introduced with effect from 1-9-1998 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 ('Act' for short) for settling tax arrears, locked in litigation at a substantial discount. Section 88 enables any person....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... filing the declarations the appellants have filed writ petitions challenging the orders dated 21-9-1995 and 24-10-1996. In the first batch of cases the Court issued notice regarding Rule, on 17-12-1998. When the matter came up for preliminary hearing, the Court made the following order :- "In view of the urgency to avail the benefit under the scheme "KAR VIVAD SAMADHAN SCHEME 98" issue rule. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncy to avail the benefit under the Scheme 'Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme 98' issue rule. The maintainability of the writ petition is kept open". This order clearly shows that the writ petition is not admitted and the notice issued is also subject to maintainability. Therefore on that date the writ petition was not admitted and pending and thus the scheme will not apply as per Section 95 of the Act.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....subject to maintainability of the writ petition is a notice under proviso to Rule 13(a), so the writ petition is not pending on that day. Accordingly, we entirely agree with the learned single Judge. In the writ petition the impugned orders are passed in the year 1995 and whereas the writ petition is filed in 1998 after delay of three years. This Court in Gopal Films v. The Deputy Commissioner of ....