ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED INTERIM ORDER
Ajay Kumar v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)
INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 94 of 2025 ·
Supplied court order; reported citation not indexed
The appeal was directed to be listed after six months.
Division Bench · Saumitra Dayal Singh · Indrajeet Shukla
1. Facts of the case
Counsel reported a miscellaneous application pending in relation to the Tribunal order and sought deferred hearing.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court accommodated that request.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was directed to be listed after six months.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
Hearing was deferred; the appeal was not disposed of.
5. Expert Comments
AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.
Deferral accommodates a pending application
The six-month listing direction follows counsel’s statement that a miscellaneous application concerning the Tribunal order was pending. It regulates the hearing timetable without deciding that application or dismissing the High Court appeal. The source does not identify the application’s provision or grounds.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF 1
An adjournment does not supply interim relief
No stay of the Tribunal order or recovery direction accompanies the postponement. The practical task is to track the miscellaneous application and subsequent listing separately; the expiry of six months does not itself establish that either proceeding was decided.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF 1
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: dfe6e781b46d219f7266bd65e8907086ae5db8e0b301ef88abc9b3b721201964
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 AKHB Expert Comments is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.