TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessment order was sustainable where the demand abstract reflected a figure inconsistent with the discussion on discrepancy 1, and where the observations on discrepancies 7 to 20 were alleged to have been lifted from an external article, warranting quashing of the order and remand.
Analysis: The discrepancy-wise discussion in the assessment order did not align with the demand abstract, since the discussion on discrepancy 1 was confined to reversal of alleged excess input tax credit, while the abstract mentioned a substantially different SGST demand. The observations on discrepancies 7 to 20 were also found to mirror material from an external article instead of reflecting an independent appraisal of the reply and supporting documents. The order therefore lacked proper consideration of the petitioner's explanation and could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The assessment order was unsustainable and was quashed. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity, including personal hearing.
Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained relief by setting aside the impugned assessment order, but the dispute was sent back for fresh adjudication by the assessing officer.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessment order that reflects inconsistency in the demand computation and reproduces external material without independent consideration of the taxpayer's reply is unsustainable and liable to be quashed with remand for fresh decision after due opportunity.
TaxTMI 
