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.
Appellant's Deposit Deemed Sufficient by Tribunal; Remaining Amount to be Paid within 8 Weeks The Tribunal found the appellant's total deposit of Rs.3.68 lakhs, comprising Rs.1.68 lakhs already paid and an additional Rs.2.00 lakhs to be sufficient. ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appellant's Deposit Deemed Sufficient by Tribunal; Remaining Amount to be Paid within 8 Weeks
The Tribunal found the appellant's total deposit of Rs.3.68 lakhs, comprising Rs.1.68 lakhs already paid and an additional Rs.2.00 lakhs to be sufficient. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit the remaining Rs.2.00 lakhs within eight weeks. Upon this deposit, the outstanding dues would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal. The appeal was scheduled for further proceedings before the Single Member Bench.
Issues: Application for waiver of predeposit of cenvat credit and penalty under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
Analysis: The judgment pertains to an application for waiver of predeposit of cenvat credit and penalty amounting to Rs.10.43 lakhs imposed under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant's representative argued that the issue revolved around the availment of cenvat credit on capital goods. The demand was upheld due to the appellant availing credit and also claiming depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the same assets. The appellant had already paid Rs.1.68 lakhs along with interest, which was acknowledged by both parties. The appellant contended that the Department's calculation was erroneous, estimating the demand to be around Rs.3.00 lakhs. The appellant expressed willingness to deposit an additional amount of Rs.2.00 lakhs. The Revenue representative did not contest the payment of Rs.1.68 lakhs already made by the appellant.
The Tribunal noted that the appellant had already deposited Rs.1.68 lakhs during the adjudication proceedings and was prepared to deposit an additional Rs.2.00 lakhs. Considering this, the Tribunal deemed the total deposit of Rs.3.68 lakhs to be sufficient for the appeal process. Accordingly, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit Rs.2.00 lakhs within eight weeks and report compliance by a specified date. Upon this deposit, the remaining dues adjudged would be waived, and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency. Additionally, the Registry was instructed to list the appeal before the Single Member Bench for further proceedings. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by Dr. D. M. Misra.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
