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 prefabricated structural components manufactured at a yard and supplied exclusively for use in the same construction project were covered by the exemption for goods manufactured at the site of construction for use in construction work at such site.
Analysis: The goods were manufactured for DMRC projects and were unique in nature, with utility confined to the designated project site. The exemption notification covered goods manufactured at the site of construction for use in construction work at such site. The expression "site" was also clarified by the Board circular to include premises made available to the manufacturer under the construction contract, where the goods so manufactured were used solely in that construction work. The components in question satisfied both the manufacturing and end-use requirements, and the Tribunal's view was consistent with the notification and circular.
Conclusion: The exemption was to the respondents and the demand of excise duty was not sustainable.