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 assessing authority could be directed to accept the counterfoil of form IIIB and extend exemption on that basis where the original form was not produced and no duplicate declaration form was obtained under the rules.
Analysis: Rule 25B of the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948 requires a dealer seeking the concession under section 4B to furnish the prescribed declaration form. The rule also provides a specific mechanism under sub-rule (15) for issue of a duplicate form when the original is lost in transit or by the selling dealer. Sub-rule (5) further contemplates production of the portion marked original. The scheme therefore makes production of the prescribed form a statutory requirement, and the benefit cannot be extended on a liberal basis by treating the counterfoil as sufficient. The provision for duplicate forms is the only statutory safeguard against loss of the original, and that remedy was not availed of.
Conclusion: The counterfoil of form IIIB could not be accepted in place of the original or a duly obtained duplicate form, and the direction granting the benefit on that basis was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute and rules prescribe production of the original declaration form and provide a distinct procedure for obtaining a duplicate on loss, the concession cannot be claimed on the basis of a counterfoil.