ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Sanjiv Gupta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others
Writ Tax No. 89 of 2022 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn in accordance with counsel’s statement.
Division Bench · Surya Prakash Kesarwani · Jayant Banerji
1. Facts of the case
A supplementary counter affidavit was taken on record. Both parties’ counsel stated that the Department was taking appropriate action to resolve the issue.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
In view of that stated ongoing action, petitioner counsel requested withdrawal at this stage.
3. Judicial decision
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn in accordance with counsel’s statement.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The proceeding ended by withdrawal; the order does not establish completed resolution or any specific tax relief.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
Keep action being taken separate from action completed. The order does not state the underlying issue, assessment year, amount, statutory provision, settlement terms or a binding deadline.
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: 98afa49e6aabc4b87da9963bc93e57b341b85c0e516fc9020db8465dfb408fa4
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.