Allowing the writ petition, the High Court observed that it is trite law that whenever a litigant invokes a particular remedy available under a Statute, then the authority before whom the lis (law suit) is preferred and pending, is ordinarily duty bound to decide the same on merits. Further, it also observed that it is also settled in law that the aggrieved person who initiates lis (law suit) has a right to withdraw the same before it is finally decided. This right of withdrawal is absolute but it is subject to the fact that withdrawal can be declined if there are cogent reasons. The High Court basis these observations held that the rejection of the prayer of withdrawal by revisional authority following decision of Bombay High Court in case of Simplex Enterprises v UOI (2002) 257 ITR 689(Bom)(HC)  is not correct as in such case the prayer for withdrawal was never made and hence by not allowing the prayer for withdrawal in present case and proceeding to decide the revision on merits, the revisional authority wrongly exercised jurisdiction vested in it.