: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2786 OF 2008 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG.NO. 2988 OF 2007 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2787 OF 2008 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO.2990 OF 2007 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2788 OF 2008 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO.2987 OF 2007 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2789 OF 2008 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO.2989 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income-Tax. .. Appellant Vs. Matru Mandir Co-op.Hsg.Soc.Ltd. .. Respondent -- Shri Vimal Gupta i/by Shri P.S. Sahadevan of the Appellant. Shri Hemant Jadia for the Respondent. -- CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & A.P. DESHPANDE, J DATE : 8TH SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. No reply to the notice of motion has been filed. However, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has no objection to allow the notices of motion. We have perused the notices of : 1 : motion and affidavits in support thereof. Apparently, sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of delay of 41 days in filing the appeals. Keeping in view the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court delivered on 29th August, 2008 in Notice of Motion No.2281 of 2008 in Income Tax Appeal (Lodging) No.1814 of 2008 and other connected matters (Ornate Traders Private Limited v. The Income-Tax Officer ), we see no reason as to why the delay should not be condoned particularly when due explanation in paragraph 2 of the affidavit in support of the notice of motion has been provided. The delay of 41 days in filing the appeals is, therefore, condoned. The Notices of Motion are accordingly allowed. 2. List the Appeals for hearing on admission on 29th September, 2008. CHIEF JUSTICE A.P. DESHPANDE, J