Rakesh Kumar Gokhroo (AY 2015-16) v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur & Ors.

1. FACTS OF THE CASE

Rakesh Kumar Gokhroo (AY 2015-16) sought withdrawal of D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14938/2025. The short order identifies the parties and docket but does not set out the underlying tax issue, amount or reason for withdrawal. AY 2015–16 appears in the petitioner’s caption.

Source: PDF p. 1

2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT

The Court accepted counsel’s withdrawal request without examining the underlying tax controversy.

Source: PDF p. 1

3. JUDICIAL DECISION

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. Pending applications were also disposed of.

Source: PDF p. 1

4. OUTCOME

Procedural withdrawal; neither the petitioner’s tax claim nor the Department’s substantive position was adjudicated.

Source: PDF p. 1

5. Expert Comments

AKHB editorial analysis, distinct from the Court’s findings.

Withdrawal does not establish the merits

The operative order records the petitioner’s choice to withdraw. It supplies no finding that a reassessment, demand or other tax action was lawful or unlawful.

Source: PDF p. 1

Do not infer an unstated reason or remedy

The source gives no settlement, payment, alternate-remedy explanation or express liberty to refile. None should be added merely because withdrawal was permitted.

Source: PDF p. 1

Retain this individual docket

This record concerns D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14938/2025. Its distinct party, date and court order must be retained even where other short withdrawal orders use similar language.

Source: PDF p. 1