2015 (8) TMI 851

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... date, the revenue took out a review petition on 29 October 2009 which also they did not prosecute. The affidavit in support of notice of motion gives no reason as to why the revenue did not take out the present notice of motion earlier to 12 June 2012. No explanation is offered as to why even after knowledge of the order dated 23 July 2009 the applicants took no steps to take out the present noti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ectthat 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 not that wherever extension .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pplication seeking to recall the order dated 23 July 2009 by the revenue is misconceived. 4. Be that as it may. even otherwise, as stated in the affidavit in support, the conduct of the revenue in this matter does not warrant the delay being condoned. The applicant has, on dismissal of the appeal for nonremoval of office objections, had taken out a review petition on 29 October 2009 being Revie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X