Quantify notice risk in 2 minutes
Notice Risk Scanner: Finin2min practical finance and law reference.
Not every tax or regulatory notice deserves the same response speed and resourcing. A ₹2 lakh non-fraud query and a ₹5 crore fraud allegation with an attachment threat both technically need "a reply," but the second one needs counsel involved before a single sentence is drafted. This scanner turns that judgement call into a repeatable, transparent score — pick the amount involved and tick whichever of six red flags apply, and it returns a 0-100 score, a risk band, and specific next actions for each flag that's ticked. It runs entirely in your browser: nothing is uploaded or stored.
Quantify notice risk in 2 minutes
Risk Output
—
Recommended action
How this score is built
This is a transparent, fixed-weight heuristic for triage prioritisation only — it is not a legal risk assessment and does not use AI or any external database. The formula, shown in full, is:
| Factor | Points |
|---|---|
| Amount involved: below ₹10 lakh | 10 |
| Amount involved: ₹10 lakh – ₹1 crore | 22 |
| Amount involved: ₹1 crore – ₹10 crore | 35 |
| Amount involved: above ₹10 crore | 48 |
| Fraud allegation | +20 |
| Arrest / prosecution risk | +18 |
| Attachment threat | +14 |
| Bank freeze risk | +12 |
| Missing documents | +10 |
| Contradictory records | +10 |
The total is capped at 100. Bands: 0–25 Low, 26–50 Moderate, 51–75 High, 76–100 Critical.
Worked example: the pre-filled scenario above
The form above opens pre-filled with a realistic example: a GST notice under Section 74A (the consolidated demand provision the Finance Act 2024 introduced for periods from FY2024-25 onward, replacing the old fraud/non-fraud split between Sections 73 and 74, and carrying a uniform 42-month notice limitation period) for ₹2.4 crore, with fraud allegation, attachment threat and missing documents ticked. Running the numbers: ₹2.4 crore falls in the ₹1 crore–₹10 crore band (35 points), plus fraud (+20), attachment (+14) and missing documents (+10) — a total of 79/100, in the Critical band. The tool's own recommended actions for that combination would tell you, correctly, to engage counsel before drafting any reply, check whether the attachment order has its own separate objection route, and reconstruct the missing document trail before the deadline rather than after.
Why these six flags specifically: each one changes either the standard of evidence needed or the range of possible outcomes, not just the paperwork. A fraud allegation shifts the burden and the applicable penalty band; an arrest/prosecution risk raises self-incrimination concerns a written reply alone can't manage; an attachment or bank-freeze threat is often independently time-bound and can cause irreversible cash-flow damage before the main notice is even decided; and missing or contradictory records are the single most common reason a factually defensible position is lost on evidence rather than on law.