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 amount deposited during investigation and left unadjusted under the Sabka Vishwas scheme was refundable to the appellant, and whether the Department could retain it when it was not treated as a pre-deposit against the show cause notice.
Analysis: The amount of Rs.29,36,382/- was admittedly deposited by the appellant during investigation. It was not adjusted in the settlement process because the Designated Committee stated that the amount could not be verified and therefore was not treated as a pre-deposit. Since the amount remained unadjusted due to the Department's failure and was never part of the admitted tax liability, it continued to be a revenue deposit with the Department. In such circumstances, retention of the amount without legal authority was impermissible.
Conclusion: The refund was held admissible and the impugned rejection was set aside. The appellant succeeded in obtaining refund with interest.
Ratio Decidendi: Amounts deposited during investigation, if not appropriated or adjusted against assessed tax dues and not legally payable, cannot be retained by the Revenue and must be refunded.