:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1803 OF 2004 OF MOTION NO. 1803 OF 2004 OF MOTION NO. 1803 OF 2004 IN IN IN INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO.486 OF 2004 TAX APPEAL (L)NO.486 OF 2004 TAX APPEAL (L)NO.486 OF 2004 Commissioner of Income Tax ..Applicant Vs. M/s.Khatau Junker Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.A.D.Kango for the Applicant. Ms.Asifa Khan i/b.D.M.Harish & Co. for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 26TH JUNE, 2007 : 26TH JUNE, 2007 : 26TH JUNE, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Notice of Motion, the Applicant is seeking condonation of 189 days delay in filing the above Appeal. However, in the above, the Scrutiny Report was called for after the expiry of period of limitation for filing the Appeal. Even, the matter was sent for drafting the Appeal on 21st October,2003 and the Memo of Appeal was received on 21st April,2004 i.e. after a lapse of six months. There is absolutely no explanation with regard to the aforesaid delay. In view thereof, we are not inclined to condone the delay in filing the above Appeal. Hence, the Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 2. In view of the dismissal of the Notice of Motion, the above Appeal does not survive. Hence, the same stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)