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 circular and the SVLDRS-3 statement were contrary to the scheme of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 in computing relief under Section 124(1)(c) on the basis of the net outstanding amount and in adjusting pre-deposits while determining the amount payable.
Analysis: The order noted the statutory definitions of "amount in arrears" and "amount payable" under Section 121 and the relief mechanism under Section 124. On the facts, the amount in arrears was taken from the order-in-original after appropriating amounts already deposited, and the designated committee computed relief and the balance amount payable accordingly. The order recorded that, on this basis, the circular did not appear to violate Section 124(1)(c) or Section 124(2), and the SVLDRS-3 computation also did not suffer from error.
Outcome: No final adjudication was made. The matter was directed to be listed again for further hearing.