ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Chaudhary Bishamber Singh Educational Society
Income Tax Appeal No. 232 of 2014 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue appeal dismissed as infructuous on counsel’s statement.
Division Bench · Bharati Sapru · Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
1. Facts of the case
Revenue counsel stated that its appeal had become infructuous. The reason, assessment year, statutory issue and underlying order are not described.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court acted on Revenue counsel’s procedural statement without examining the tax grounds.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed as having become infructuous.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
No tax merits winner or quantified relief can be identified from this disposal.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Do not infer exemption eligibility, registration or settlement merely from the educational-society name. The underlying proceedings and later treatment need separate verification.
Source and verification
Complete one-page supplied order read and visually inspected. Individual Drive original SHA-256 independently verified; complete text matches the preserved source-review packet. AY and PAN are not stated. Later treatment and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: b17b7a87b5b7b3fa17e455724d8ce78c4db81d0a9840ea285b3a451fca54156b
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-19. Later proceedings, compliance and current precedential treatment have not been comprehensively verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.