SAS 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.2328 OF 2006 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2328 OF 2006 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2328 OF 2006 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.914 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.914 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.914 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Kaikobad Byramjee & Sons Agency Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.S.Rao with P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.P.J.Pardiwala i/b. Mulla & Mulla C.B.& C.for respondent. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 22ND OCTOBER, 2007. DATED : 22ND OCTOBER, 2007. DATED : 22ND OCTOBER, 2007. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- . There is a delay of 399 days in preferring the appeal. There is affidavit in support of the Motion. The order of the I.T.A.T. dated 7/10/2004 was received by the CIT on 23/12/2004. Approval of the CIT was received on 11/4/2006. The due date fof filing the appeal was 22/4/2005. The file was handed over to Pantel Counsel on 13/4/2005. The draft appeal memo was received on 7/12/2005. The appeal was filed on 22/4/2006 (wrongly stated as 26/5/2005). There is no explanation whatsoever for the delay between 7/12/2005 and 26/5/2006. Considering the cause shown, in our opinion, the same would not amount to sufficient cause. Hence Motion is dismissed. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, J.) (F.I.REBELL0, J.)