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 Commissioner could exercise suo motu revisional power after the normal period for reopening or rectification of the assessments had expired, without recording cogent reasons showing that the delay was justified.
Analysis: The assessments had attained finality, and the normal periods for reopening under section 35 and rectifying under section 36 had long expired before the revisional notices were issued. In such a situation, exercise of revisional power under section 34 required the Commissioner to apply his mind to the relevant facts and circumstances and record why the action was taken after the ordinary period, with reference to reasonable time, bona fide exercise of power, and any exceptional or supervening circumstances justifying the delay. The revisional order did not disclose any such consideration or basis.
Conclusion: The revisional order was unsustainable for want of reasons showing that the power under section 34 had been exercised within a reasonable period, and the matter had to be reconsidered afresh in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a final assessment is sought to be reopened in suo motu revision after the ordinary statutory periods for reopening or rectification have expired, the revisional authority must record cogent and sufficient reasons demonstrating that the power was exercised bona fide and within a reasonable time.