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 a dealer remained eligible for the benefit of the settlement scheme when the original assessment order had been set aside in appeal or revision and a fresh assessment order was passed after 1 April 2002.
Analysis: The definition of "arrears" under section 2(1)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Settlement of Arrears) Act, 2008 refers to tax, penalty or interest for which assessment had been made prior to 1 April 2002 and remained pending collection on the date of application. Where the original assessment is set aside on appeal or revision and the matter is remanded, the subsequent fresh assessment substitutes the earlier order. The mere fact that the fresh order is made after remand and after 1 April 2002 does not alter the character of the original assessment for the purpose of the scheme. A contrary clarification denying the benefit on the footing that the original assessment became non est was not accepted.
Conclusion: The dealer was entitled to the benefit of the settlement scheme, and denial of eligibility on the ground of remand and fresh assessment was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: When an assessment made prior to the cut-off date is set aside in appeal or revision and replaced by a fresh assessment on remand, the fresh order does not destroy the dealer's entitlement under a settlement scheme that turns on the date of the original assessment.