ITA No. 63 of 2009 10.9.2010 Present: Mr. Saurabh Gautam vice Mr. Vayur Gautam, Counsel for the appellant. Mr.Vinay Kuthiala and Ms. Vandana Kuthiala, Counsel for the respondents. OMP(M) No. 20 of 2009 Detailed affidavit to explain the delay has not been filed despite repeated opportunities granted. By means of this appeal filed on 22nd October, 2009 the appellant has laid challenge to the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 28.12.2004. According to the appellant, the delay has occurred due to the fact that the appellant company was wrongly prosecuting its remedy of an appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court which appeal was withdrawn on 24.4.2008. The respondents in reply to the said application have mentioned that the order of the Tribunal was passed on 28.12.2004 and the appeal was filed in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court much after the period of limitation had expired on 4.3.2007. Even as per the averments made by the appellant himself, the appeal was withdrawn from the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court on 24.8.2009. There is no explanation worth the name as to why after the appeal was withdrawn from the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 24.8.2009 it was not immediately filed in this Court and why it took almost two months to file the same in this Court. There is also no explanation for the delay of almost three years after the passing of the order of the Tribunal before filing the appeal in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Opportunity was given to the appellant to file a detailed affidavit, which has not been filed. Hence, we find no reason to condone the delay and the application is dismissed. ITA No. 63 of 2009 In view of the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay, the appeal is dismissed as time barred. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. 10th September, 2010 ( Sanjay Karol ), J. ™