{"id":111455,"date":"2008-10-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-10-18T14:45:31","modified_gmt":"2017-10-18T09:15:31","slug":"sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 31\/10\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU\n\nWrit Petition (MD). No.4126 of 2006\nand\nW.P.M.P.No.4334 of 2006 &amp;\nM.P.No.1 of 2008\n\nSree Nithyakalyani Textiles Limited,\nChinnakara Mangalam,\nTiruvadanai Taluk,\nRamanathapuram District,\nRepresented by its Managing Director,\nN.Nagappan.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t.. Petitioner\n\nVs.\n\n1.The Commissioner of Central Excise,\n   Central Revenue Building\n    BibiKulam,\n    Madurai.\n2.The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals)\n    Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Madurai.\n3.The Customs Excise and Service Tax Tribunal,\n   South Zonal Bench,\n    Chennai.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t.. Respondents\n\nPrayer\n\nWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\nto issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records comprised in\nstay order No.286\/06 dated 29.03.2006, on the file of the third respondent and\nquash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to dispense with the\npre deposit and hear the appeal before the third respondent.\n\n!For Petitioner\t...\tMr.Raghavan for\n\t\t\tMr.R.Karthikeyan\n^For Respondent\t...\tMr.C.Arul Vadivelu alias Sekar\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>By consent of both parties the writ petition itself is disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The adjudicating authority under the Central Excise Act confirmed the<br \/>\ndemand of Rs.25,89,250\/- and imposed a penalty of Rs.25,00,000\/-  on the<br \/>\npetitioner by order in Original No.1 of 2004 dated 19.01.2004. Challenging the<br \/>\nsame, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise<br \/>\n(Appeals) in Appeal No.154 of 2004. The appellate authority confirmed the demand<br \/>\nof Rs.25,89,250\/- but reduced the penalty from 25,00,000\/- to Rs.10,00,000\/- by<br \/>\norder dated 28.07.2004. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred an<br \/>\nappeal to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Along with the<br \/>\nappeal he filed a petition under Section 35(F) of the Central Excise Act for<br \/>\nstay. However, the petitioner did not deposit the entire amount with the<br \/>\nadjudicating authority as required under Section 35(F) of the Act. He prayed for<br \/>\ndispensing with the said payment. The appellate tribunal by order dated<br \/>\n29.03.2006 in No.E\/PD\/701\/2004 in E\/Appeal No.1338\/2004 directed the the<br \/>\npetitioner herein to deposit 50% of the duty amount within four weeks from the<br \/>\ndate of the order. The tribunal however directed to report compliance on or<br \/>\nbefore 10.05.2006. Challenging the direction given by the Tribunal to deposit<br \/>\n50% of the duty amount, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appellate<br \/>\ntribunal did not take into account the undue hardship and other circumstances<br \/>\nunder which the petitioner was forced to pray for dispensation with pre deposit.<br \/>\nHe has raised several grounds in the writ petition relating to his contention<br \/>\nthat the petitioner is not liable to pay the duty as confirmed by the appellate<br \/>\nauthority.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t 4. Mr. C.Arul Vadivel  appearing for the respondents would submit that<br \/>\nthe writ petition is liable to be dismissed for two reasons. According to him,<br \/>\nthe order which is under challenge is an appellable order and so this writ<br \/>\npetition is not maintainable. He would further submit that in the petition filed<br \/>\nbefore the appellate tribunal except making a vague assertion that the<br \/>\npetitioner would be put to undue hardship, there is no other materials made<br \/>\navailable justifying his request for dispensation with the pre deposit. He<br \/>\nrelies on a judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/945859\/\">BENARA VALVES LTD. vs.<br \/>\nCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE<\/a> (2006 (204) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.).\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. I have considered the rival submissions. In the petition filed before<br \/>\nthe tribunal seeking to dispense with the pre deposit, the petitioner has not<br \/>\nmade out any case to establish undue hardship to him.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t 6. In Benara Valves Limited case cited supra, the Honourable Supreme<br \/>\nCourt had an occasion to deal with the similar situation regarding undue<br \/>\nhardship to the assessee. In paragraphs 11 to 15, the Honourable Supreme Court<br \/>\nhas held as follows;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;11. Two significant expressions used in the provisions are &#8220;undue<br \/>\nhardship to such person&#8221; and &#8220;safeguard the interests of revenue&#8221;. Therefore,<br \/>\nwhile dealing with the application twin requirements of consideration of undue<br \/>\nhardship aspect and imposition of conditions to safeguard the interest of<br \/>\nRevenue have to be kept in view.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. As noted above there are two important expressions in Section 35(F).<br \/>\nOne is undue hardship. This is a matter within the special knowledge of the<br \/>\napplicant for waiver and has to be established by him. a mere assertion about<br \/>\nundue hardship would not be sufficient. It was noted by this Court in S.VASUDEVA<br \/>\nv. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS (AIR 1994 SC 923) that under Indian conditions<br \/>\nexpression &#8220;undue hardship&#8221; is normally related to economic hardship. &#8220;Undue&#8221;<br \/>\nwhich means something which is not merited by the conduct of the claimant, or is<br \/>\nvery much disproportionate to it. Undue hardship is caused when the hardship is<br \/>\nnot warranted by the circumstances.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. For a hardship to be &#8216;undue&#8217; it must be shown that the particular<br \/>\nburden to have to observe or perform the requirement is out of proportion to the<br \/>\nnature of the requirement itself, and the benefit which the applicant would<br \/>\nderive from compliance with it.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. The word &#8220;undue&#8221; adds something more than just hardship. It means an<br \/>\nexcessive hardship or a hardship greater than the circumstances warrant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15. The other aspect relates to imposition of condition to safeguard the<br \/>\ninterest of revenue. Therefore, the Tribunal while dealing with the application<br \/>\nhas to consider materials to be placed by the assessee relating to undue<br \/>\nhardship and also to stipulate condition as required to safeguard the interest<br \/>\nof revenue.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>As per the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court it is incumbent on the<br \/>\npart of the petitioner to establish that he would suffer undue hardship if the<br \/>\namount is recovered from him. Thus the petitioner has not made out any case to<br \/>\ndispense with the pre deposit. However, the tribunal has taken a very lenient<br \/>\nview to dispense with 50% of the amount demanded. Thus I find no reason to<br \/>\ninterfere with the order impugned. On this ground alone the writ petition is<br \/>\nliable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Regarding  maintainability of the writ petition, as pointed out by the<br \/>\nAssistant Solicitor General, any order made under Section 35(F) is appealable<br \/>\nwhich  includes an order refusing to dispense with pre deposit. But the<br \/>\npetitioner has not chosen to prefer any appeal and on this ground also the writ<br \/>\npetition is liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. In the result, the writ petition fails and the same is accordingly<br \/>\ndismissed. The interim order made in W.P.M.P.No.4334 of 2006 dated 05.05.2006<br \/>\nstands vacated and the petition  W.P.M.P.No.4334 of 2006 is dismissed. M.P.No.1<br \/>\nof 2008 is closed. No costs.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\njikr\n\nTo\n1.The Commissioner of Central Excise,\n   Central Revenue Building\n    BibiKulam,    Madurai.\n\n2.The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals)\n    Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg, Madurai.\n3.The Customs Excise and Service Tax Tribunal,\n   South Zonal Bench,\n    Chennai.<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31\/10\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Writ Petition (MD). No.4126 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.No.4334 of 2006 &amp; M.P.No.1 of 2008 Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles Limited, Chinnakara Mangalam, Tiruvadanai Taluk, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-111455","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":947,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008"},"wordCount":947,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008","name":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles ... vs The Commissioner Of Central ... on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-18T09:15:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sree-nithyakalyani-textiles-vs-the-commissioner-of-central-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sree Nithyakalyani Textiles &#8230; vs The Commissioner Of Central &#8230; on 31 October, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111455","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=111455"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111455\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=111455"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=111455"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=111455"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}