The Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 v. Dilip H Chhabria

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1964 OF 2008IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODGING) NO. 1464 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-8 Versus Dilip H Chhabria ).. Appellant ).. Respondent Mr Suresh Kumar i/b Mr P P Kakade for the Appellant.Mr S S Shetty for the Respondent. CORAM:SWATANTER KUMAR, C. J. & A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATE:28TH JULY 2008. P.C. This is an application for condonation of delay of 509 days infiling the present Appeal against the order dated 31[st] March 2006. Thelearned Counsel appearing for the Respondent strongly opposes thecondonation of delay on the ground that no proper explanation has beenrendered. The reading of the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motionclearly shows that the copy of the order though passed on 31[st] March2006, they claimed that the copy was received on 25[th] August 2008. Thereafter, there is no explanation rendered as to what happened upto8[th] December 2006. The delay is not properly explained. It is obligatoryupon the part of the Department to explain the reason for suchinordinate delay in filing the Appeal. The inordinate unexplained delaycannot constitute a sufficient cause for condonation of delay. We mayalso refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in TheState of Maharashtra vs Vithu Kalya Govari and others, Civil ApplicationNo.3200 of 2007 dated 26[th] June 2008. For these reasons, Notice ofMotion is dismissed. 2.As a result of the dismissal of Notice of Motion forcondonation of delay, Appeal (Lodging) No. 1464 of 2008 does notsurvive. We may also notice that the proposed question of law referredin the present Appeal, while impugning the order in question, reads asunder :- “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal has erred in not upholding 3different additions ?” The above question is purely a question of fact in the -3- circumstances of the case and does not reflect even a question of lawmuch less a substantial question of law. 4.Appeal (Lodging) No.1464 of 2008 dismissed. No order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE A P DESHPANDE, J.