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 interim protection should be granted against the assessment and appellate orders concerning denial of input tax credit under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Analysis: The petition assailed the assessment under Section 74 and the consequent appellate order on the footing that the goods were purchased from a registered supplier, the purchase consideration including tax was paid through banking channels, and the transaction was supported by invoices, bilties and e-way bills. The challenge also invoked Section 16 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, including Section 16(2)(c), to contend that denial of input tax credit could not rest merely on alleged non-deposit of tax by the supplier. On this showing, the Court found a prima facie case for interim protection.
Conclusion: Interim stay was granted against operation of the impugned orders, subject to deposit of 30% of the assessed tax after adjustment of tax already deposited.