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 tax assessment and appellate order could stand when the revisionist's application under the Government Order dated 18.02.2016 remained pending and no order was passed on it before proceeding with assessment under Section 28(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008.
Analysis: The revisionist had applied for the benefit of the Government Order dated 18.02.2016, which contemplated acceptance of applications even beyond the initial period on payment of interest by the competent authority. The record showed that the application was not rejected and no order was passed by the Commissioner or the competent authority, while tax liability was nevertheless assessed and sustained in appeal. In these circumstances, the Court treated the failure to decide the application as material and found that the impugned tax order had been passed without first dealing with the pending request under the scheme.
Conclusion: The assessment order could not be sustained in its existing form and the matter required fresh consideration in light of the Government Order dated 18.02.2016 and the pending application.
Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded to the extent that the impugned order was set aside and the matter was sent back for reconsideration on the basis of the pending scheme application.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxpayer's application under a beneficial scheme remains pending and the competent authority does not decide it, a consequential tax order passed without first addressing that application is liable to be set aside and reconsidered.