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 reversal of input tax credit under the proviso to Section 19(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was applicable to a manufacturer effecting inter-State sales during the relevant period, and whether the impugned reversal order was sustainable.
Analysis: Input tax credit under Section 19(1) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was available for purchases used in manufacture or processing of goods in the State. The proviso restricting credit to the extent of three per cent, inserted on 08.11.2013, was construed as operating only in the context of dealers purchasing goods and selling them in inter-State trade under Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The restriction was held not to be intended for manufacturers whose credit arose from inputs used in manufacture or processing, and the subsequent deletion of the proviso reinforced that the impugned reversal was founded on an incorrect application of the provision.
Conclusion: The impugned reversal of input tax credit was held unsustainable as against the petitioner. The matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration and a speaking order.