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 draft assessment order and corrigendum were unsustainable where the return of income had in fact been filed, and whether the assessment proceedings required reconsideration in the circumstances.
Analysis: The notice under Section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 called upon the petitioner to file the return of income for assessment year 2018-19, and the return was filed before the draft assessment order was passed. The draft order proceeded on the incorrect premise that no return had been filed. The subsequent corrigendum only noted the filing of the return but otherwise retained the same conclusions. In these circumstances, the assessment could not proceed on the basis of non-filing of return, and the matter required reconsideration. The Court also noted the limitation position under Section 153(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and observed that the time spent in prosecuting the writ petition would be liable to exclusion while computing limitation.
Conclusion: The draft assessment order and the corrigendum were set aside, and the Income-tax Department was permitted to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent that the impugned assessment action was annulled, but the revenue was left free to recommence proceedings lawfully after taking note of the Court's observations.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessment founded on an incorrect assumption that no return of income was filed cannot be sustained once the return has in fact been filed and brought on record.