Nma/3985/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-8, Mumbai v. Parle Pet Private Limited Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORIGINAL SIDE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3985 OF 2008 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3985 OF 2008 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 2162 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 2162 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes,Office : Memoranda of Coram, : Court’s or Judge’s orders appearances,Court ’s : orders or directions & : Prothonotary’s orders. : ------------------------------------------------------------ Mr Sureshkumar, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms Vasanti B Patel, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN and V.C.DAGA, JJ. and V.C.DAGA, JJ. DATED : 5TH DECEMBER, 2008. DATED : 5TH DECEMBER, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Parties. 2. Perused Notice of Motion and affidavit in support thereof. 3. By this notice of motion, the appellant is seeking condonation of 555 days delay in filing the appeal. The impugned order is dated and the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax-V, Mumbai granted approval for filing of Appeal on 8.12.2006. However, the appeal is lodged on 21.7.2008 which is after lapse of more than one and half years. The main reason mentioned in the affidavit for the delay in filing the appeal is drafting of the large number of appeals and obtaining grant for stamps and purely due to administrative exigencies and the procedural formalities, etc. appellant. We are not at all satisfied with the reasoning given in the affidavit. No case is made out for condoning the delay. 4. In the above circumstances, we are left with no alternative but to dismiss the notice of motion for want of sufficient cause in filing the appeal belatedly. 5. In the result, notice of motion stands dismissed. 6. In view of dismissal of notice of motion, appeal also stands dismissed.