ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Nimish Rastogi v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Another
Income Tax Appeal Defective No. 22 of 2020 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Taxpayer appeal dismissed as withdrawn on counsel’s request.
Division Bench · Surya Prakash Kesarwani · Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
1. Facts of the case
Income Tax Appeal Defective No. 22 of 2020. Counsel stated that the appellant wanted to withdraw the appeal; Revenue’s counsel had no objection. The order states no assessment year, PAN or account of the underlying tax merits.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Hon’ble Court accepted the procedural withdrawal request. It did not determine the underlying assessment or prosecution grounds, grant fresh-proceeding liberty, or decide a substantive tax issue.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The appellant’s appeal ended procedurally without substantive tax relief. No merits finding in favour of Revenue is inferred from the withdrawal.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Do not supply an unstated reason such as low tax effect, settlement or success in another proceeding. The source does not record a stay, fresh-filing liberty or later outcome.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. Actual individual Drive original SHA-256 independently verified; complete text matched the preserved review packet. Assessment year and PAN are not stated. Later compliance, subsequent proceedings and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: 2b8e825d4722aec4eb187bddac878ea09989be1cd66573ca16cb5c896d77021b
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.