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 refusal to condone the delay in filing the returns and the consequential refusal to waive interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C for the assessment years in question was sustainable under Circular No. 670 dated 26.10.1993.
Analysis: The circular contemplated consideration of belated returns where the delay occurred for reasons beyond the control of the assessee and enabled the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Board where the conditions were otherwise satisfied. The record showed that in respect of one assessment year the Commissioner had accepted that the delay was not attributable to the petitioners. In that situation, a uniform refusal across the remaining years could not be sustained without an independent examination of whether the delay was liable to be condoned or the matter required reference to the Board.
Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner of Income-tax for fresh decision on condonation of delay or reference to the Board, with a direction to complete the exercise within six months.