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 proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 on the original side of the Bombay High Court, the duty to draw up orders lies on the party or on the Registrar, and whether the time taken in drawing up the order is to be excluded while computing the period for filing the certified copy and memorandum under section 18.
Analysis: Section 640A of the Companies Act, 1956 excludes, for the purpose of filing an order with the Registrar, both the time taken in drawing up the order and the time taken in obtaining a certified copy. Rule 37 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 provides that every order under the Companies Act is to be drawn up by the Registrar unless otherwise directed. In view of that rule, the earlier original-side practice requiring a party to draft the order did not govern orders under the Companies Act. The dual-system practice could not shift to the litigant a duty which the Companies (Court) Rules placed on the Registrar, and the party could not be prejudiced by office delay in drawing up the order.
Conclusion: The duty to draw up the order was on the Registrar, and the period taken in drawing up and obtaining the certified copy had to be excluded; there was no delay attributable to the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the Companies (Court) Rules cast on the Registrar the duty to draw up orders under the Companies Act, the litigant cannot be penalised for office delay, and the excluded time under section 640A must be computed by leaving out the period consumed in drawing up the order and obtaining the certified copy.