ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Faiyaz v. Income Tax Officer Ward - 5 (1) (3) Noida And Another
Income Tax Appeal Defective No. 53 Of 2024 ·
2025:AHC:60035-DB
the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
Division Bench · Shekhar B. Saraf · Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
1. Facts of the case
Faiyaz requested withdrawal through counsel.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Bench accepted the withdrawal request without examining the underlying tax merits.
3. Judicial decision
the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The proceeding ended at the requesting party’s instance.
5. Expert Comments
AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been verified.
The taxpayer chose withdrawal
Faiyaz’s counsel sought withdrawal of Defective Appeal 53/2024 and the Court dismissed it on that request. The defective designation does not establish that limitation was decided or that the appeal was rejected after a merits hearing.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
Keep the recorded reason narrow
No settlement, monetary-limit policy or fresh-proceeding liberty appears. This is a taxpayer withdrawal, so Revenue’s litigation-policy rationale from other cases cannot be imported. The order establishes closure on 22 April 2025 and leaves the underlying tax reasoning unstated.
Source: PDF p.1 · PDF p.1, complete supplied order
Source and verification
Complete supplied 1-page original read and all source page images visually inspected; original bytes verified by SHA-256 against the ledger. No PAN is stated. Subsequent treatment and current law have not been cleared.
Source SHA-256: fe98ea461115c7e1c938a5b699184f03873bdd55d0bd2af473b07b8ff23be461
Only source-identified provisions are recorded. No current monetary threshold, current statutory equivalence or 2025 Act applicability is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-21. 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 Expert Comments section is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.