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 petitioner was entitled to return of the undivided share of property purchased by the Government as bought-in-land in revenue recovery proceedings after the sales tax arrears were settled under the Amnesty Scheme.
Analysis: The sale under Section 50(2)(i) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act concerned only the petitioner's undivided 1/5th share, and the Government had not taken actual possession of the property. The petitioner had pursued reconveyance and was later permitted to settle the arrears under the Amnesty Scheme, after which the demanded amount was remitted. In such circumstances, equity supported restoration of the property, and the earlier purchase by the Government did not justify retention of the land when the basis of the recovery had been addressed.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to return of the property, and the respondents were directed to cancel the sale and confirmation orders, if any, and restore the property.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the Government was required to restitute the bought-in land to the petitioner within the time fixed by the Court.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a defaulter settles the arrears under an amnesty arrangement and the State has not taken effective possession of the bought-in property, equity may require restoration of the property to the original owner.