bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1040 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Smt.Vimla S.Jajoo ..Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant. Mr.Madhur Agarwal with Mr.A.K.Jasani for respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE : 16th NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard. Perused appeal. 2. The appeal is directed against the order dated 27th November, 2006 which is nothing but a corrigendum to the order dated 31st October, 2006. The opening part of the appeal also indicates that the appeal is against the order dated 27th November, 2006. 3. Mr.Vimal Gupta, Learned Counsel for the Revenue submits that the challenge to the order dated 27th November, 2006 is wrongly made. According to him, the challenge ought to have been made to the substantive order of the Tribunal dated 30th October, 2006, as such he took us to the said order and made his submissions. 4. Having heard Mr.Gupta, assuming he is right, even then the appeal against the order dated 30th October, 2006 would be barred by limitation for want of challenge within time. No prayer for amendment much less for condonation of delay is to be found. Hence, the submission made is misplaced. 5. Be that as it may, having gone through the order dated 31st October, 2006, no case can be said to have been made out by the appellant to entertain this appeal against the impugned order. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine for want of substantial question of law, with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)