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 the local purchases of raab galawat and raab salawat made by the dealer on oral instructions of ex-U.P. principals and despatched on the same day were liable to be treated as the dealer's own purchases and subjected to tax.
Analysis: Oral directions received by telephone or through a representative can constitute prior purchase orders when the surrounding circumstances show that the orders were few in number, executed on the same day, and followed by immediate despatch of the purchased goods to the principals. In such a situation, maintaining a written record of every oral order was not essential. The documents produced by the dealer showed that the purchases, quantity, timing of despatch, and commission basis were consistent with agency transactions and indicated that the local purchases and despatches formed one continuous and inseparable arrangement for the ex-U.P. principals.
Conclusion: The purchases could not be treated as the dealer's own purchases, and the levy of tax on that basis was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where contemporaneous conduct and supporting documents establish that local purchases were made and despatched as part of a single agency transaction for principals outside the State, the transactions cannot be taxed as the dealer's own purchases merely because the orders were oral.