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 penalty under Section 11AC and Rules 173Q and 210, and interest under Section 11AB, were leviable where the assessee had collected an amount in excess of duty and was liable only to deposit that amount under Section 11D.
Analysis: Penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB are attracted only where duty of excise has not been levied, has not been paid, or has been short levied or short paid. On the facts found, there was no short payment of duty; the assessee had merely failed to deposit the excess amount collected from buyers. Such amount was exigible under Section 11D, but that by itself did not justify penalty under Section 11AC or interest under Section 11AB. For the same reason, the penal provisions in Rules 173Q and 210 could not be invoked.
Conclusion: The penalty under Section 11AC and Rules 173Q and 210, and the demand of interest under Section 11AB, were not sustainable and were set aside. The duty demand was upheld.