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 assessee could claim set-off on High Speed Diesel purchases only up to the date of the High Court's later decision, on the basis that the earlier legal position should operate prospectively.
Analysis: The controversy turned on whether a judicial pronouncement declaring the correct legal position can be confined to future transactions. The Court applied the settled principle that judicial decisions ordinarily operate retrospectively because judges declare the law as it always was, and a later decision merely clarifies the correct legal position. Prospective overruling is an exception, not the rule, and no basis existed for the Commissioner to give prospective effect to the bar on set-off under the relevant VAT framework. The amendment to the rules was also understood in the light of the later authoritative clarification that set-off on HSD purchases was not available.
Conclusion: The claim for set-off could not be restricted to a prospective date, and the assessee was not entitled to the relief sought.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the rejection of the set-off claim failed, and the dismissal of the appeal stood confirmed.
Ratio Decidendi: A judicial decision declaring the correct law ordinarily applies retrospectively, and prospective effect can be granted only in exceptional cases expressly warranting prospective overruling.