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 assessment and rectification orders were liable to be set aside for breach of natural justice, including non-supply of relied-upon documents and denial of personal hearing, and whether the matter should be remanded for de novo consideration.
Analysis: The assessment was founded on an investigation report and material from railway authorities, but the documents relied upon were not supplied to the petitioner despite request. The rectification application was also rejected without granting a personal hearing, although Section 24(1) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 requires a reasonable opportunity of being heard before rejection on the ground that there is no mistake apparent on record. The orders were described as cryptic and unsupported by any disclosed justification, and the Court held that such defects amounted to a clear failure to observe the rule of law and principles of natural justice. The Court therefore declined to permit the defects to be cured by affidavit and directed a fresh adjudication by another officer.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after supplying the relied-upon material and granting a personal hearing.