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.2981 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO.2981 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO.2981 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL (L)NO.2231 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL (L)NO.2231 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL (L)NO.2231 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax, ..Appellant Vs. Shri.Manish M.Shah ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. None 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 : 11TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 11TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 11TH 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 499 days’ delay in filing the above Appeal. In the above, the Appellant is challenging the order dated 23rd October, 2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax had granted approval for filing an Appeal on 7th March, 2007. However, the present Appeal has been lodged only on 24th July 2008 i.e. after a lapse of almost 1 year and 4 months. The reasons given for causing such a gross delay are, purely due to administrative exigencies and the procedural formalities which were required to be complied with by the Revenue. 2. We are not at all satisfied with the reasons :2: given for causing such a delay and we are not inclined to entertain the present Notice of Motion. 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.)