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 writ petitioner, facing an adverse appellate order under the goods and services tax law and without a functional appellate tribunal, was entitled to be permitted to pursue the statutory appeal later and to obtain the benefit of statutory stay till such appeal is decided.
Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides a first appeal under Section 107(1), constitution of the appellate tribunal under Section 109, and a stay mechanism under Section 112(9). Since the tribunal had been notified but was not yet functional due to non-appointment of its President or members, the Court treated the situation as one where the statutory appellate remedy could not presently be effectively availed. To balance equities, the Court directed that the petitioner may file the appeal once the President or State President assumes office, and that the statutory stay would continue in operation till disposal of that appeal. The Court also clarified that the benefit would not enure unless the required pre-deposit for appeal was made within the time granted.
Conclusion: The petitioner was granted a limited protective remedy by way of deferred access to the statutory appeal and continuation of stay, but only on compliance with the deposit requirement and subject to filing the appeal when the tribunal becomes functional.