ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED INTERIM / PROCEDURAL ORDER
Golden Gaming International Pvt. Ltd. Lko. Thru. Its Director Pankaj Lalmani Yadav v. Income Tax Officer Lko. And Others
WRIT TAX No. 73 of 2024 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
List as fresh on 9 April 2024; Revenue counsel was to obtain instructions about the missing digital signature and be shown in the cause list.
Division Bench · Sangeeta Chandra · Brij Raj Singh
1. Facts of the case
The petitioner’s reopening approval raised a question about absence of digital signature on page 56 of the approval. Revenue counsel filed an appearance.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court sought specific instructions rather than determining validity of the approval.
3. Judicial decision
List as fresh on 9 April 2024; Revenue counsel was to obtain instructions about the missing digital signature and be shown in the cause list.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The petition remained pending; no invalidation or stay was ordered.
5. Expert Comments
AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.
Authentication was a question for instructions
Golden Gaming’s order isolates the absence of a digital signature on page 56 of the reopening approval. It directs Revenue counsel to obtain specific instructions and list the case as fresh on 9 April 2024. That inquiry is not a conclusion that the approval was legally invalid.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
The approval record is the practical focus
To understand this challenge, the actual approval, its authentication and the response to the Court’s query matter. Page 56 refers to the approval material, not a missing page of this one-page order. No reopening notice was quashed and no stay was granted by the supplied direction.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
Source and verification
Complete supplied 1-page original read and visually inspected; original bytes independently SHA-256 verified against source map and ledger. No present-law or subsequent-treatment clearance is claimed.
Source SHA-256: 7e8aa636365f98ac05a4255ff4181816ad52d5e0390115695beb8984a8a44158
Only source-identified provisions are recorded. No current monetary threshold, current statutory equivalence or 2025 Act applicability is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-21. 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 Expert Comments section is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.