bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.652 OF 2010 IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.185 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs ..Appellant Vs. M/s.VVF Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Jately for appellant. Mr.Jas Sanghvi i/b. PDS Legal for respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & K.K.TATED,JJ. DATE : 23RD MARCH,2010 P.C. Heard. Perused Notice of Motion and appeal. 2. This appeal was filed on 1st December, 2005. Right upto November, 2006, office objections were not removed. With the result, the Prothonotary & Senior Master rejected the appeal under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court Original Side Rules. Thereafter, almost after three years i.e. on 1st December, 2009 a Notice of Motion was taken out for restoration of appeal that did not contain prayer for condonation of delay. Consequently, that Motion was allowed to be withdrawn by an order dated 23rd February, 2010. Thereafter, a fresh Motion was taken out on 17th March,2010. It is, thus, clear that the appeal is pending since 2005. If one takes the date of filing of appeal and date of taking out a Notice of Motion for restoration of appeal with condonation of delay, it would be clear that the appellant has taken almost three years to take out Motion for restoration of appeal. The explanation for causing such a gross delay in taking out a Notice of Motion for restoration of appeal cannot be accepted considering gross negligence on the part of the Revenue. The Notice of Motion is, therefore, stands dismissed. 3. In view of dismissal of Notice of Motion, the present appeal also stands dismissed. (K.K.TATED,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)