ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and another v. Vishal Kumar Mansinghka
Income Tax Appeal No. 29 of 2022 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
The appeal was dismissed because the quantum was below the CBDT monetary limit for departmental appeals.
Division Bench · Surya Prakash Kesarwani · Jayant Banerji
1. Facts of the case
The assessee had raised a preliminary monetary-limit objection. The order reproduces an earlier interlocutory order dated 23 March 2022 allowing Revenue time to obtain instructions.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
On 12 April 2022 Revenue counsel stated, on instructions, that the quantum was below the CBDT limit for departmental appeals and requested dismissal on that ground.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed because the quantum was below the CBDT monetary limit for departmental appeals.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue’s appeal ended on the monetary-limit ground. The underlying tax merits were not adjudicated.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Use 12 April 2022 as the disposal date, not the quoted 23 March order or proposed 29 March listing. No numerical threshold, assessment year, circular number or tax amount is stated. Preserve the separate parties and appeal numbers 29/2022 and 30/2022.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page original read and visually inspected; original PDF bytes verified by SHA-256. Only source-identified provisions and assessment years are recorded. No PAN is stated. Subsequent treatment and current law have not been cleared.
Source SHA-256: c013817fe8498abec12ef2255f7dc5bcd81bf4bb8f1d6a1bd42abb275934900d
Only source-identified provisions are recorded. No current monetary threshold, current statutory equivalence or 2025 Act applicability is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-20. Subsequent proceedings 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.