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, in the absence of a functional Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner could be permitted to preserve the appellate remedy by filing the appeal later while obtaining protection of the statutory stay, and whether the recovery proceedings could be kept in abeyance subject to deposit of the prescribed amount.
Analysis: The writ petition arose from a demand under the Chhattisgarh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, against which the first appeal had already been partly allowed and the balance demand sustained. As the statutory second appellate forum under the Act had been notified but was not yet functional because the President or Members had not assumed office, the Court accepted that the petitioner should not be deprived of the appellate remedy because of non-constitution of the Tribunal. The Court directed deposit of 20% of the disputed demand and required filing of the appeal before the Tribunal within the stipulated period after the Tribunal becomes functional. It was also directed that the statutory stay under Section 112(9) would continue to operate until the appeal is decided, and if the appeal is not filed within time, the State would be free to proceed with recovery.
Conclusion: The petitioner was granted protection to pursue the statutory appeal before the Tribunal on compliance with the deposit condition, and the recovery action was kept in suspension till the appeal is decided in accordance with law.