Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - I, Lko. v. M/S Maa Raktdantika Contractors And Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Authorized Person/ Director

1. Facts of the case

Revenue’s appeal against Maa Raktdantika Contractors and Suppliers came before the Lucknow Bench for compliance with appellate service requirements.

Source: PDF p.1, complete supplied order

2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court

The Bench noted ChapterXXVII Rule 5(2) of the Allahabad High Court Rules,1952: the affidavit must address service of the memorandum and written intimation of filing and hearing dates.

Source: PDF p.1, complete supplied order

3. Judicial decision

List as fresh on 27 March 2025 to enable Revenue counsel to comply with Rule 5(2).

Source: PDF p.1, complete supplied order

4. Outcome / in whose favour

An opportunity for procedural compliance; the appeal was not disposed of.

Source: PDF p.1, complete supplied order

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.

The service affidavit must cover more than delivery

In Income Tax Appeal No. 2 Of 2025 against Maa Raktdantika Contractors and Suppliers, the Court identified Chapter XXVII Rule 5(2) as requiring the Commissioner to attest service of the memorandum and written intimation of the filing and hearing dates. Delivery of the appeal copy alone would not address all elements described in the order.

Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order

Compliance opportunity leaves the appeal pending

The fresh listing on 27 March 2025 was to enable compliance, not to dismiss the appeal or decide its tax merits. Appeals 2/2025 and 3/2025 retain separate dockets and order dates despite the shared wording. The affidavit and date intimations should be matched to the relevant appeal; this source does not certify that service was later completed.

Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order