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 Tribunal was correct in extending stay of demand beyond 365 days under Section 254(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The question was already covered by the authoritative decision striking down the restrictive part of the third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as confirmed by the Supreme Court. In the connected matters, the appeals had also become infructuous because the relevant Tribunal proceedings had already been adjudicated.
Conclusion: The Tribunal's order extending stay beyond 365 days could not be faulted, and the appeals did not give rise to any substantial question of law.