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 respondent was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 48/89-C.E. on the basis that the kraft paper manufactured contained not less than 75% bagasse pulp by weight.
Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 48/89-C.E. applied to kraft paper made from bagasse containing not less than 75% by weight. The Collector had examined the manufacturing figures, accepted an allowance towards moisture, additives and reel core weight, and found that the percentage of bagasse pulp in the total quantity of pulp used exceeded 75% during the relevant period. The Revenue did not dispute the figures relied upon by the Collector and produced no evidence to show that the allowance granted was incorrect or that the finding on bagasse content was unsustainable. As the trade notice required determination on the basis of pulp alone, the factual conclusion reached in the impugned order remained unrebutted.
Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification, and the Revenue's challenge failed.