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 reassessment proceedings under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 were barred by limitation because the notice proposing revision was served after expiry of five years, or whether the relevant date was the date of issue of the notice.
Analysis: Section 16 permits assessment of escaped turnover within five years from the expiry of the relevant year. The decisive question was when reassessment proceedings are initiated. The Court applied the principle that initiation occurs when the assessing authority issues the notice commencing reassessment, and not when the notice is served on the assessee. Since the notice proposing revision was issued on 30 March 1972, before expiry of the limitation period, the proceedings were within time.
Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were not barred by limitation and the objection based on late service of notice failed.