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 Customs was bound to issue a certificate to the DGFT confirming that the DFIA licences could not be utilised because the admissibility of duty-free import of Boric Acid remained under litigation, so that the expired licences could be considered for revalidation under the Handbook of Procedures.
Analysis: The request was not for Customs to revalidate the licences itself, but only to certify the factual position that the licences could not be used because Customs had continued to contest the benefit and the imports had been allowed only provisionally. Under Para 2.13.1 of the Handbook of Procedures, revalidation is for the licensing authority, but the factual justification for such revalidation has to be furnished to that authority. The expiry of the licences could not fairly be attributed to the importer when non-utilisation resulted from continued litigation and refusal of duty-free clearance. The contention that physical custody of the licences by Customs was necessary was rejected, since the licences had effectively remained under constructive control of Customs for the purpose of debit while the dispute continued.
Conclusion: Customs was required to issue the requested certificate to the DGFT within two weeks so that the appellant could seek revalidation of the expired DFIA licences.