ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Mukesh Kuma Agrawal v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra
Income Tax Appeal No. 634 of 2012; Civil Misc. Withdrawal Application No. 07 of 2021 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Taxpayer appeal dismissed as withdrawn.
Division Bench · Sunita Agarwal · Deepak Verma
1. Facts of the case
Income Tax Appeal No. 634 of 2012. Counsel pursued Civil Misc. Withdrawal Application No. 07 of 2021, referring to the withdrawal application dated 12 January 2021. The supplied order does not state an assessment year, PAN, tax amount or underlying tax ground.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Hon’ble Court accepted the withdrawal request and did not examine or decide the substantive tax dispute. No additional reason for withdrawal is supplied by this note.
3. Judicial decision
The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The withdrawal application was allowed.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The taxpayer’s appeal ended procedurally at the requested withdrawal stage. No merits decision validating or invalidating the underlying tax action was recorded.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Do not infer a Vivad Se Vishwas option, low-tax-effect reason, settlement, fresh-proceeding liberty or later restoration where the source does not state it.
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: de2e6b249c00e0c8703096628f5fe0ad0db19f074a4817dd1ab4b6215a260a66
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.