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 waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery should be granted pending appeal in a classification dispute relating to Di Calcium Phosphate - Animal Feed Grade.
Analysis: The classification dispute was found to be highly debatable at the prima facie stage, with the manufacturing process indicating acidulation that could support classification under Chapter 28. The plea based on IS specification was not found sufficient for waiver at this stage. The appellant's plea of financial hardship was rejected on the basis of the balance sheet, which showed profit and available reserves. The plea against invocation of the extended period was also not accepted prima facie, as no material was produced to show that the department had been informed of the manufacturing activity.
Conclusion: The appellant was directed to deposit Rs.1,00,00,000 within eight weeks, and on compliance the balance demand was stayed till disposal of the appeal.