ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Rekha Devi v. Union of India through Mohit Kumar Nigam, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax / Initiating Officer
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 2294 of 2022 ·
2025:AHC-LKO:61791
The application was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Single Judge · Brij Raj Singh
1. Facts of the case
The Section 482 application was called in the revised list without appearance for the applicants.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The State’s Additional Government Advocate was present; the Court disposed of the application for non-prosecution.
3. Judicial decision
The application was dismissed for want of prosecution.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The underlying allegations were not determined.
5. Expert Comments
AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.
Dismissal for default does not determine the initiating action
Rekha Devi’s application 2294/2022 was dismissed after non-appearance in the revised list. Although the caption describes a Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax / Initiating Officer, the short order does not identify the enactment, alleged offence or subject of the initiating action. No tax or benami merits conclusion can safely be reconstructed from the title.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
Preserve the separate record and the citation anomaly
This application and Dinesh Kumar Verma’s 2378/2022 print the same neutral citation but have different parties and dockets. Retaining both with that disclosure avoids losing a distinct case through citation-based deduplication. The source does not decide restoration, and no subsequent procedural outcome is represented here.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
Source and verification
Complete supplied 1-page original read and every page visually inspected; original PDF bytes verified by SHA-256 against the review ledger. Only source-identified provisions and assessment years are indexed. No PAN is stated. No current-law clearance is claimed.
Source SHA-256: a4ef0b1daea5bac8cda988330f89d59c970733cdb7ede24d273a33af943fb339
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.