Itxa/402/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -16, Mumbai v. Shri Harsha A. Bhogle

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.447 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.Shri Ahmed Aliji Nandoliya ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for appellant.Mr. Dr. Daniel i/b. V.S. Hadade for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.460 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.Shri Harsha A. Bhogle ..Appellant...Respondent. Mr. P.S. Sahadevan with A.A. Mane for appellant.Mr. Sanjiv M. Shah for respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.671 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax V/s.M/s. Malhar Information Services ..Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr. D.K. Kamwal for appellant.Mr. A.K. Jasani for respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 23RD JULY, 2009. P.C. :- All the above appeals which are placed for admission today, were in fact placed for admission on an earlier occasion when conditional order was passed to the effect that all office objections should be removed within the time stipulated therein, failing which the appeals shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. 2.Admittedly, the office objections have not been removed in all the above appeals within the stipulated time though the appeals are pending in this Court for sufficiently long time. It is pertinent to note that wherever extension of time for removal of office objections were sought within the period specified, this Court has granted extension of time. However, in all the above matters, neither the objections are removed within the stipulated time nor extension of time is sought for removing the office objections. As a result, the conditional order has become operational and all the above appeals stood dismissed for want of removal of office objections after the expiry of the stipulated time. In this view of the matter, no further order is necessary. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)