Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an arbitral award becomes executable under section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 once an application under section 34 is refused by the court of first instance, or only after all appellate remedies, including an appeal to the Supreme Court, are exhausted.
Analysis: Section 36 provides that an award is enforceable when the time for making an application under section 34 has expired, or where such application having been made has been refused. The expression used is the refusal of the section 34 application, and the statutory text does not say that the refusal must be final after appeal. The scheme of sections 34, 36 and 37 shows that the refusal contemplated is the refusal by the court before which the section 34 application is made, while section 37 separately provides an appeal against that refusal. The pendency of an appeal does not, by itself, suspend execution, and an appellate remedy is not equivalent in all respects to a stay of the original adjudication. The object of arbitration is speedy resolution, and execution cannot be postponed until every challenge is exhausted in the absence of a stay order.
Conclusion: The award was executable despite pendency of the appeal before the Supreme Court, and the objection to execution was rejected.