IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1466 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1466 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1466 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.953 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.953 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.953 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant Vs. Shri.Manmohan Gupta .. Respondent Mr.A.D.Kango for the Appellant. Mr.A.K.Jasai for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & SANTOSH BORA, JJ. SANTOSH BORA, JJ. SANTOSH BORA, JJ. DATE : 23rd April, 2008 DATE : 23rd April, 2008 DATE : 23rd April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Notice of Motion the Appellant is seeking condonation of 11 days 11 days 11 days delay caused in taking out the present Notice of Motion and the Appellant is also seeking extension of time for removal of office objections in the Appeal. 2. Perused our earlier order dated 16th February, 2008 passed in the Notice of Motion No.1882/2007, wherein this Court had condoned the delay caused in filing the Appeal subject to payment of costs of Rs.7500/- by the Appellant to the Respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of that order. By the said order dated 16th February, 2008 the Appellant was also directed to remove office objections within a period of six weeks, failing which the Appeal was to stand dismissed for non prosecution without further reference to the Court. 3. It appears that as per the aforesaid order dated 16th February, 2008 passed in the Notice of Motion No.1882/2007 the Appellant has not paid the costs of Rs.7500/- and has not even removed the office objections within the time stipulated. The Appellant has taken out the present Notice of Motion No.1466/2008 on 15th April, 2008, and the same has not yet been served on the Respondent. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this Notice of Motion. Hence, the Notice of Motion No.1466/2008 stands dismissed. 4. Needless to state that as per the order dated 16th February, 2008 passed in the earlier Notice of Motion No.1882/2007, the Appeal has already been dismissed for non-prosecution because of non-removal of office objections. (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (SANTOSH BORA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)