bgp bgp bgp 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.3247 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO.3247 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO.3247 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2121 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2121 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2121 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax, ..Appellant Vs. M/s.Kunal Plastics Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr.Prakash Shah i/b.PDS Legal 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 : 4TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 4TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 4TH DECEMBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking the condonation of 666 days’ delay in filing the above Appeal. Perused the Affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion. The above Appeal has been filed against the order dated 28th April, 2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. It appears that the present Appeal has been lodged on 16th July, 2008 i.e. after a lapse of 666 days. It is mentioned in the Affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion that the delay has occurred for the reasons which were beyond the control of the Appellant and the delay caused is purely due to administrative exigencies and the procedural formalities which were required to be complied with by the Appellant. 2. The aforesaid reasons given are not sufficient :2: to condone the delay in filing the above Appeal. Hence, the Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 3. In view of the dismissal of the Notice of Motion, the above Appeal also 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.)