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 ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.357 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.357 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.357 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.53 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.53 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG) NO.53 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Chika Overseas Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.S.Rao with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.S.J.Mehta for respondent. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 16TH APRIL, 2008. DATED : 16TH APRIL, 2008. DATED : 16TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. The Motion is filed for condonation of 1069 days delay in filing the above appeal. Perused the affidavit filed in support of the Notice of Motion. The order of I.T.A.T. is dated 21/6/2004. The affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion is totally vague and no particular dates have been given with regard to the steps taken by the appellant and the reasons for the delay occurred in between those steps. The reasons given for the delay in filing the appeal is that there was stalemate between the Law Ministry and the Income Tax Department due to which appeal papers were kept in abeyance and it was beyond the control of the appellant and administrative exigencies and procedural formalities. The reasons given are totally unsatisfactory. No case is made out for condoning the delay. Notice of Motion is dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.)