:1: [ASN] [ASN] [ASN] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2503 OF 2008 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.190 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax-13. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Maharashtra State Co.op. Marketing FEderation Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr.S.N.Inamdar and Mr. A.K. Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATE : 24TH FEBRUARY,2009. PC : 1. Heard parties. 2. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal restored to file, considering the cause shown. The learned counsel points out that they have complied with all the requirements. . Apart from that, it is submitted that the appeal was dismissed for non compliance of the order and in these circumstances, when the appeal was dismissed, the costs of Rs.10,000/- ought not to have been imposed upon the officer concerned. When an appeal is dismissed for non compliance of the order, the question of awarding cost to the other side would not arise more so from the officer concerned. That would be punitive. Considering :2: the facts and circumstances, we have recalled the order imposing costs upon the officer. The learned counsel states that the said amount has been deposited in the court. On producing a copy of this order, the Prothonotary & Sr.Master of this court is directed to refund the amount deposited in the court to the person who had deposited the same. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)