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 reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and the consequential permission and notice were liable to be quashed on the ground of change of opinion in respect of the taxability of inverters as electronic goods.
Analysis: The original assessment orders contained no discussion or finding on whether inverters fell within the entry of electronic goods. In the absence of any earlier adjudication on that point, the reassessment could not be characterised as a mere change of opinion. The question whether inverters were electronic goods required examination on the basis of their specifications and could properly be gone into by the Assessing Authority in reassessment proceedings. The circular issued by the Commissioner was also only a general direction to examine the issue and did not finally decide the taxability question.
Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were valid and the challenge to the circular, permission order, and notice failed.