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 an adjudication order raising tax, interest and penalty in excess of the amounts specified in the show-cause notice, and confirming demand on grounds beyond the notice, is sustainable under section 75(7) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Analysis: Section 75(7) mandates that the amount of tax, interest and penalty demanded in the order shall not exceed the amount specified in the notice and that no demand shall be confirmed on grounds other than those specified in the notice. The show-cause notice in the present matter disclosed a much lower composite amount, whereas the impugned order raised the demand far beyond the notice amount. Such enhancement was held to be contrary to the statutory limitation under section 75(7).
Conclusion: The impugned demand order was unsustainable in law and was quashed, with the matter sent back for fresh adjudication after affording opportunity of response and hearing.