ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
M/s Jain Abhusan Palace v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Four Others
Writ Tax No. 1254 of 2019 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Tax writ dismissed as infructuous after counsel stated that the petitioner did not wish to proceed.
Division Bench · Biswanath Somadder · Vivek Agarwal
1. Facts of the case
In Writ Tax No. 1254 of 2019, counsel stated on instructions that the client did not wish to proceed further. The supplied order does not identify the underlying tax action, assessment year, PAN or demand.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Hon’ble Court recorded the instruction not to proceed. Its operative disposal was dismissal as infructuous; it did not determine the underlying tax controversy.
3. Judicial decision
Writ Tax No. 1254 of 2019 was dismissed as infructuous.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The petitioner’s writ ended without substantive tax relief or a merits determination. The order records no fresh-petition liberty or stay.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Use the exact operative term “infructuous”. Counsel’s statement that the client did not wish to proceed is not a basis to relabel this order as a withdrawal dismissal or infer an unstated settlement, satisfaction of demand or assessment result.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. The actual individual Drive original SHA-256 is independently verified and the complete extracted text matches the preserved review packet. No assessment year or PAN is stated. Later proceedings and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: 0d904471c6e4cdc781595922d79fe9766d3a6808b47ffc9eabb98778c661e4a6
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-19. Later proceedings, compliance 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 REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.