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 Assessing Officer could refuse to give effect to the appellate order and proceed with attachment proceedings merely because a rectification application was pending, and whether the recovery notices issued in that situation were sustainable.
Analysis: The appellate order had already modified the assessment and the Assessing Officer was bound to give effect to it. Pendency of an application under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 did not justify withholding implementation of the appellate order. In the circumstances, the recovery action under section 226(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could not be sustained on the basis adopted by the Assessing Officer.
Conclusion: The impugned refusal to implement the appellate order and the consequential attachment notices were unsustainable, and the petitioner obtained relief, though with directions to recompute and pay the tax found due.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with directions for fresh computation of tax liability in accordance with the appellate order, while the recovery notices and the affected assessment order were quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessing authority must give effect to an appellate order and cannot withhold implementation merely because rectification proceedings are pending; consequential recovery action founded on such non-compliance is not sustainable.