ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
M/s L.H. Sugar Factories Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another
Income Tax Appeal No. 200 of 2016; Withdrawal Application No. 4 of 2021 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Withdrawal application allowed and taxpayer appeal dismissed as withdrawn after counsel stated that the appellant had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020.
Division Bench · Naheed Ara Moonis · Dinesh Pathak
1. Facts of the case
In Income Tax Appeal No. 200 of 2016, counsel moved Withdrawal Application No. 4 of 2021 with an affidavit and requested withdrawal because the appellant had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. The supplied order states no assessment year, PAN, tax amount or substantive tax issue.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Hon’ble Court accepted the withdrawal request after recording that Revenue’s counsel had no objection. It did not adjudicate the tax merits or certify completion of the scheme process.
3. Judicial decision
Withdrawal Application No. 4 of 2021 was allowed. Consequently, Income Tax Appeal No. 200 of 2016 was dismissed as withdrawn.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The appellant obtained the requested procedural withdrawal. The order does not determine tax liability or establish a completed settlement, payment, certificate or final discharge under the scheme.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Opting for a scheme, as stated by counsel, is distinct from proving that every statutory settlement step was completed. Obtain the actual scheme records and later docket before asserting final settlement. The separate L.H. Sugar appeals 157/2016, 200/2016 and 201/2016 retain distinct dockets and originals; a repeated withdrawal-application number does not merge the orders.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. Actual individual Drive original SHA-256 independently verified; complete text compared with the preserved review record. No assessment year or PAN is stated. Later compliance, subsequent treatment and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: b6bc45a6cfb9ffbc95e5c9d9886041b2aa62c108e9816f577673fb881ad5cf44
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.