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 revision and reassessment orders under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 should be set aside to enable the assessee to respond to the pre-revision notices and have the matter reconsidered afresh.
Analysis: The common proviso to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 27 requires a reasonable opportunity to show cause before a revision order is passed. The pre-revision notices had been issued, but the assessee was permitted to file its replies belatedly in the light of the circumstances placed before the Court. Since the dispute also involved reconciliation of turnover figures, the appropriate course was to allow the assessee to respond and require the authority to examine the reply on merits and redo the revision exercise de novo.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside only to facilitate consideration of the assessee's replies, and the matter was remitted for fresh decision in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The proceedings were reopened for a fresh statutory exercise after receipt of the assessee's reply, with the substantive issues left to be decided afresh by the assessing authority.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a revision order under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 is challenged for want of effective consideration of the pre-revision response, the authority must afford a reasonable opportunity and may be directed to undertake the matter de novo.