ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Nivedan Fin-Invest Lease Ltd. v. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle and another
Writ Tax No. 497 of 2022 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
Division Bench · Surya Prakash Kesarwani · Jayant Banerji
1. Facts of the case
The writ challenged a Section 148 notice for AY 2015-16. Counsel stated that reassessment had now been completed and that the petitioner would challenge the reassessment order in appeal.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court acted on the withdrawal request.
3. Judicial decision
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The writ ended procedurally; the reassessment order and notice were not quashed by this disposal.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
The intention to appeal is counsel’s stated reason for withdrawal. The order does not extend appeal limitation, condone delay, admit an appeal or decide the validity of reassessment.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page original read and visually inspected; original PDF bytes verified by SHA-256. Only source-identified provisions and assessment years are recorded. No PAN is stated. Subsequent treatment and current law have not been cleared.
Source SHA-256: d9beeb8c9a4f9e03054d50329280e23575cd363438e55054e6ca5a17e8dff124
Only source-identified provisions are recorded. No current monetary threshold, current statutory equivalence or 2025 Act applicability is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-20. Subsequent proceedings 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.