Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

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.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (9) TMI 1504

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xemption claimed in terms of the Act, in the light of Forms F filed by the petitioner. The present impugned orders constitute reassessment on the ground that Form F original file was incorrect and could not be reconciled. 3. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent fairly states that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered in favour of the assesseee by a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu [(2004) 134 STC 473]. The relevant paragraphs are extracted below: 100. In terms of Clause (3) of Article 269, inter-state sale is contrasted from local sale. 101. An order passed by the statutory authority who has jurisdiction therefore, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... no reason to elevate it to a higher status than the rest of the provisions" . 106. With utmost respect, therein the Court did not take into consideration that the provisions of Section 6A having been provided by way of exclusionary clause subject to the satisfaction of the conditions precedent contained therein, and, thus, the same stand at an elevated stage over charging Section 6 of the Act. The assessing authority while passing an order is required to take into consideration the jurisdictional fact. Once it is found, having been conferred with a plenary power to determine its own jurisdiction, that he did not have any jurisdiction under the Act, the opinion of the assessing authority attains finality. What would be a jurisdicti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Kerala: [1957] 1 SCR 837, this Court observed: "There is a broad distinction between the provisions contained in the statute in regard to the exemptions of tax or refund or rebate of tax on the one hand and in regard to the non-liability to tax or non-imposition of tax on the other. In the former case, but for the provisions as regards the exemptions or refund or rebate of tax, the sales or purchases would have to be included in the gross turnover of the dealer because they are prima facie liable to tax and the only thing which the dealer is entitled to in respect thereof is the deduction from the gross turnover in order to arrive at the net turnover on which the tax can be imposed. In the latter case, the sales or purchases ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Pradesh to the branch office outside the State for delivery of the goods to the buyer..." 111. The Court in the facts of that case held that the movement from the head office to the branch office was for the purpose of delivery to the branch office, thereafter to the buyer through the branch office. The branch office merely acted as a conduit through which the goods passed on their way to the buyer. It is, however, relevant to note that the Court noticed : "...It would have been a different matter if the particular goods had been dispatched by the registered office at Hyderabad to the branch office outside the State for sale in the open market and without reference to any order placed by the buyer. In such a case if the go....