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 impugned order admitting the winding up petition could be interfered with on the basis of the appellant's defence of short supply and belated debit notes.
Analysis: The purchase orders, supplies, invoices and part-payments were not in dispute. The defence rested on debit notes raised nearly two and a half years after the supplies, purportedly under a warranty clause. The warranty clause covered manufacturing defect, bad workmanship or quality, and not short supply. The debit notes were found to be bare round figures without particulars of the alleged deficiency and without any prompt correspondence or objection. In commercial transactions, debit notes may evidence adjustment of accounts, but when raised after substantial delay they must be scrutinised with care. Under Sections 41 and 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the buyer is entitled to inspect the goods and must object within a reasonable time, which under Section 63 is a question of fact. On the facts, the delayed debit notes were treated as false and sham, and the debt remained due and payable.
Conclusion: The appeal was held to be without merit and the impugned order was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: A buyer cannot defeat an admitted commercial liability by raising belated and unsupported debit notes after an unreasonable delay, especially where the alleged objection does not fall within the contractual warranty and no timely protest or particulars of short supply are shown.