ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Hempal Singh v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut and Another
Writ Tax No. 314 of 2005; Civil Misc. Withdrawal Application No. 9 of 2021 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Tax writ dismissed as withdrawn; any interim order stood vacated.
Single Judge · Saumitra Dayal Singh
1. Facts of the case
Writ Tax No. 314 of 2005. Counsel pursued Civil Misc. Withdrawal Application No. 9 of 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. Revenue’s counsel had no objection to the request.
3. Judicial decision
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The withdrawal application was allowed. Any interim order, if one existed, stood vacated.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The taxpayer’s writ ended procedurally at the requested withdrawal stage. No merits decision validating or invalidating the underlying tax action was recorded. The conditional interim-order wording does not prove that interim protection actually existed.
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. Identify any actual interim order separately before relying on its vacation.
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: c660d270ad7b6a40a1f4e7fefa01d2400a7d3a557fd62c4e5c5f9fef01f3b82d
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.