Case LawHigh Court › Praful Surana v. Income Tax Officer Ward...

Praful Surana v. Income Tax Officer Ward 30 1 & Ors

High Court 30 May 2023 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Praful Surana v. Income Tax Officer Ward 30 1 & Ors
Date of order
30 May 2023
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Praful Surana v. Income Tax Officer Ward 30 1 & Ors, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~352 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decision delivered on: 02.08.2023 + W.P.(C) 7624/2023 PRAFUL SURANA ..... Petitioner Through: Ms Mitika Choudhary, Adv. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 30 1 & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Gaurav Gupta, Sr. Standing Counsel. Mr Chiranjiv Kumar & Mukesh Sachdeva, Advs. for U.O.I. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHERHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM No.39140/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM No. 39139/2023 2. This is an application filed seeking recall of order dated 30.05.2023. 3. A perusal of the order would show that the petitioner’s counsel, i.e., Ms Mitika Choudhary, had made a submission before the Court that she has instruction to withdraw the writ petition, as the assessment order has been passed. 3. A perusal of the order would show that the petitioner’s counsel, i.e., Ms Mitika Choudhary, had made a submission before the Court that she has instruction to withdraw the writ petition, as the assessment order has been passed. 4. Since liberty was sought to take recourse to an appropriate remedy as per law, leeway in that behalf was granted. 5. It is not disputed by Ms Choudhary that since the time order dated 30.05.2023 was passed, a statutory appeal has been preferred. 6. In our view, this application is completely without merit. 7. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. 8. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order. RAJIV SHAKDHER JUDGE AUGUST 2, 2023/RY GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGE Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan