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 notices proposing rectification of the assessments could be sustained without first determining, by a lawful test or examination, whether the product manufactured by the petitioner was a petroleum by-product falling within the notified entry of lubricating oil, and whether the clarifications issued in respect of other traders could be applied to the petitioner's product.
Analysis: The levy under the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 depends upon the goods being brought within the charging provision and the relevant notification. The petitioner's product was asserted to consist only of demineralised water and mono ethylene glycol and, on that basis, to be neither a petroleum product nor lubricating oil. The impugned clarifications were issued in relation to other products and other traders, and no independent enquiry was made into the ingredients of the petitioner's coolant before invoking them against the petitioner. In these circumstances, the rectification notices were issued on an unsupported assumption of identity of goods and without examining the actual composition of the petitioner's product.
Conclusion: The notices proposing rectification were quashed. The clarifications were held inapplicable to the petitioner unless it is established on proper examination that the product contains petroleum by-products attracting the notified entry, and the authority was left free to conduct such examination and proceed in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner.