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 writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Tax on Entry of Goods Into Local Areas Act, 2007 and seeking relief against assessment and demand orders could be entertained in view of the earlier binding decision upholding the Act and the interim orders passed by the Supreme Court.
Analysis: The writ petitions questioning the vires of the Act had already been dismissed by the High Court in the earlier batch after upholding the legislative competence of the State and the validity of the levy as not offending Article 301 of the Constitution of India. The present petition sought to reopen the same constitutional challenge and to rely upon interim orders passed by the Supreme Court in connected matters. Those interim directions were confined to the facts of the cases before the Supreme Court and were expressly of a temporary nature. They did not operate as precedent or as a basis to re-agitate issues already decided. The petitioner was, in any event, left to pursue the statutory remedies against assessment and demand orders in accordance with law.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable on the constitutional challenge and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue remedies against notices and assessment orders under the Act.