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 ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2635 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2635 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2635 OF 2007 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1507 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1507 OF 2007 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1507 OF 2007 Omprakash Bagadia .. Appellant Vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax .. Respondent Mr.Sameer Dalal for the Appellant. Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 2nd April, 2008 DATE : 2nd April, 2008 DATE : 2nd April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 615 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. For the reasons stated in the affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, specially in view of the fact that the Appellant was pursuing certain alternative remedy as stated in the said affidavit, sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Perused the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 5.2.2007 whereby the assessee’s Misc.Application No.479/2005 was partly allowed and partly rejected, and the substantial question of law raised in the present Appeal relates to the aforesaid partly rejected Misc.Application. There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafide on the part of the Appellant. Hence, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 2. Place the Appeal on board for admission on 21.4.2008. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)