1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.801 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Eagle Agro Frams Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.802 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Sunmak Enterprises P. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.817 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Sai Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.838 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Agriculture Produce Market Committee ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.848 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Subham Securities Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.860 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Royal Western India India Turf Club ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.872 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. 2 Shri Kantilal N. Shah ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.885 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Shivparvati Construction ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.889 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Amit & Co. ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan with A.A. Mane for appellant. Mr. K.B. Bhujle for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.983 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Ohm Stock Broker (P) Ltd ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant. None for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD JULY, 2009. P.C. :- 1. All the above appeals which are placed for admission today, were in fact placed for admission on an earlier occasion when conditional order was passed to the effect that all office objections should be removed within the time stipulated therein, failing which the appeals shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. 2. Admittedly, the office objections have not been removed in all the above appeals within the stipulated time though the appeals are pending in this Court for sufficiently long time. It is pertinent to note that wherever extension of time for removal of office objections were sought within the period specified, this Court has granted extension of time. However, in all the above matters, neither the objections are removed within the stipulated time nor extension of time is sought for removing the office objections. As a result, the conditional order has become operational and all the above appeals stood dismissed for want of removal of office objections after the expiry of the stipulated time. In this view of the matter, no further order is necessary. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)