Rule 202 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026

Where this rule sits

Rule 202 gives effect to Section 389 of the Income-tax Act, 2025. A rule cannot go beyond the section it serves: where the two seem to differ, the section governs.

← Rule 201  ·  Rule 203 →

What this rule does

The rule prescribes by reference rather than by prescription. For an appeal to the High Court under section 389(1) against a ruling pronounced or an order passed by the Board for Advance Rulings, whether the appeal is by the assessee or by the Assessing Officer on the directions of the Commissioner, the form and manner of filing shall be the same as provided in the applicable procedure laid down by the jurisdictional High Court for filing an appeal to that High Court.

No Form number is prescribed, no fee is fixed and no period is stated in the rule; all of that follows the High Court's own procedure and section 389.

Why it is there

Section 389(1) creates a right of appeal to the High Court but the mechanics of filing in a High Court are the High Court's to regulate, and each has its own rules of practice, formats and fees. Prescribing a form under the Income-tax Rules would either conflict with those rules or duplicate them. Rule 202 avoids both by adopting the jurisdictional High Court's applicable procedure for the form and manner of filing.

Who it applies to

• An assessee appealing to the High Court against a ruling pronounced or an order passed by the Board for Advance Rulings
• The Assessing Officer filing such an appeal on the directions of the Commissioner
• The Commissioner giving those directions

What this means in practice

There is nothing to look up in Appendix III for this appeal: the form and manner are those of the jurisdictional High Court, so the answer changes with the High Court in which the appeal lies and has to be taken from that Court's own rules. The rule also confirms that both sides file the same way — an appeal by the Assessing Officer, which requires the Commissioner's directions, follows the same High Court procedure as one by the assessee. What the rule does not touch is equally important: the right of appeal, who may appeal and any period for doing so are matters for section 389, not for rule 202.

An example

A company disagrees with a ruling of the Board for Advance Rulings and decides to appeal to the High Court under section 389(1). It does not look for a Form No. In these rules; it files in the format, with the papers and fee, that the jurisdictional High Court's own procedure prescribes for an appeal to that Court. The Assessing Officer, appealing against the same ruling on the Commissioner's directions, files in that same manner.

Where you meet this rule

You meet it when an advance ruling is challenged: it is the rule that tells you the filing requirements come from the High Court's registry and practice rules, not from the Income-tax Rules.

The words themselves

What people get wrong

• Searching Appendix III for a prescribed Form. Rule 202 prescribes none and adopts the jurisdictional High Court's procedure.
• Applying one High Court's format in another. The rule points to the jurisdictional High Court for the case in hand.
• Reading the rule as the source of the right of appeal, or of the time to file. Those are matters for section 389; rule 202 governs form and manner only.
• Assuming a departmental appeal follows some other route. Rule 202 applies alike to the assessee and to the Assessing Officer appealing on the directions of the Commissioner.