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 Tribunal, while dealing with a petition under Section 71(10) of the Companies Act, 2013, could defer repayment by granting time to explore settlement instead of directing immediate redemption of debentures and payment of principal and interest due.
Analysis: The petition concerned admitted default in payment of interest on secured non-convertible debentures. Section 71(8) requires a company to pay interest and redeem debentures according to their terms, while Section 71(10) empowers the Tribunal, on application by debenture-holders or the debenture trustee, to direct the company to redeem the debentures forthwith on payment of principal and interest due thereon. The order of the Tribunal had proceeded on the company's financial distress and granted time to explore settlement, but the statutory scheme did not confer power to substitute that relief with a settlement-oriented direction. The record also showed no effective steps toward settlement or arbitration, and the company did not appear before the Appellate Tribunal.
Conclusion: The Tribunal ought to have acted strictly under Section 71(10) and directed repayment of the amounts due and payable; the direction granting time for settlement was unsustainable, and the appellants were entitled to an order for payment within a fixed time.