{"id":14239,"date":"1971-09-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1971-09-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971"},"modified":"2018-05-03T15:47:22","modified_gmt":"2018-05-03T10:17:22","slug":"s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","title":{"rendered":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nS.   B. JAIN, I.T.O. NAGPUR\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMAHANDERA\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT07\/09\/1971\n\nBENCH:\n\n\nACT:\nIncome-tax Act, 1961, s. 297(2)(d)(ii)-Income-tax Act, 1922,\nS.  34(1)(a)--Notice under latter Act held beyond  time-..If\nproceedings pending within meaning of s. 297 (2) (d) (ii).\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe Income-tax Officer issued a notice to the respondent  on\nJanuary 5, 1962 under s. 34(1) (a) of the Indian  income-tax\nAct,  1922,  seeking  to  reopen  his  assessment  for\t the\nassessment  year  1945-47.  The\t respondent  challenged\t the\nvalidity  of  that  notice.   The  High\t Court\tquashed\t the\nimpugned  notice  by its order dated March 6,  1963  on\t the\nground that the notice was issued beyond the time prescribed\nby  law.  On April 1, 1962 the Indian Income-tax Act,  1961,\ncame  into 'force.  Under s. 297(2) (d) (ii) of this Act  if\n\"any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment  within\nthe meaning of that expression in s. 147 and no\t proceedings\nunder  s.  34  of the repealed Act in respect  of  any\tsuch\nincome are pending at the commencement of this Act, a notice\nunder  s.  148\tmay  .... be issued  with  respect  to\tthat\nassessment year. . . . \" The Income-tax Officer again issued\na  notice  under  s. 148 of the New Act in  respect  of\t the\nassessment which he earlier unsuccessfully sought to  reopen\nby means of notice under s. 34(1) (a) of the 1922 Act.\t The\nrespondent again challenged the validity of the notice.\t The\nHigh  Court  quashed  that notice on  the  ground  that\t the\nIncome-tax  Officer was not competent to issue that  notice.\nIn  appeal  to this Court it was contended that\t the  notice\nunder  s.  34(1) (a) being an invalid notice on\t the  ground\nthat  it was barred by limitation the proceedings  initiated\non  the\t basis\tof the notice should be\t considered  as\t not\npending\t when the new Act came into force.   Dismissing\t the\nappeal,\nHELD  :\t What  s.  297(2)(d)(ii)  requires  is\tthe  factual\npendency  of a proceeding under s. 34 of the  repealed\tAct.\nWhether\t that proceeding was barred by limitation or not  is\nirrelevant.   The  proceedings pending\tbefore\ta  competent\nauthority cannot be said to be not pending merely because no\nrelief can he granted in that proceedings because of the bar\nof  limitation.\t  The proceedings in the present  case\twere\ninitiated  by  a competent authority and  those\t proceedings\nwere  quashed  for  the reason that the\t notice\t was  issued\nbeyond the time prescribed by law.  Hence it cannot be\tsaid\nthat  no  proceedings under s. 34 of the  1922\tAct,  either\nfactually  or legally, was pending at the time when the\t new\nAct came into force. [617 D]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos.  1301  of<br \/>\n1971 and 1981 of 1968.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeals\t by special leave from the Judgment and order  dated<br \/>\nNovember 15, 1956 of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench  in<br \/>\nSpecial Civil Application No. 150 of 1963.<br \/>\nB.   Sen,  J. Ramamurthy, R. N. Sachthey and B.\t D.  Sharma,<br \/>\nfor the appellant (in both the appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p>A.   S.\t Bobde,\t G.  L. Sanghi and B. R.  Agarwal,  for\t the<br \/>\nrespondent (in both the appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">615<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nHegde,\tJ. Civil Appeal No. 1301 (NCT) of 71 is\t by  special<br \/>\nleave.\t  This\t appeal\t was  filed  under   the   following<br \/>\ncircumstances<br \/>\nCivil Appeal No. 1981 of 1968 was brought on the strength of<br \/>\na  certificate issued by the High Court.  That\tcertificate,<br \/>\nbeing  not  in accordance with law in as much  as  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt  gave  no reason in support of the  same,\t the  appeal<br \/>\nfiled  on the strength of that certificate turned out to  be<br \/>\nnot maintainable.Hence the    appellant\t had  to  move\tthis<br \/>\nCourt for special leaveto appeal against  the judgment\tof<br \/>\nthe High Court. The same having been granted he has  brought<br \/>\nCivil  Appeal  No.  1301 of 7 1.  Hence\t these\ttwo  appeals<br \/>\nagainst the same judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>Now coming to the merits of the case, the Income-tax Officer<br \/>\nissued\ta notice to the respondent on January 5, 1962  under<br \/>\nsection 34(1) (a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 seeking<br \/>\nto reopen his assessment for the assessment year 1946-47 the<br \/>\nrelevant accounting year being the calender year 1945.\t The<br \/>\nassessee  respondent challenged the validity of that  notice<br \/>\nby  means  of  a  writ petition under  Article\t226  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution  before  the High Court of\t Bombay.   The\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt accepted that writ petition ,and quashed the  impugned<br \/>\nnotice\tby its order dated March 6, 1963.  On April 1,\t1962<br \/>\nthe  Income-tax Act, 1961 came into force.   Thereafter\t the<br \/>\nIncome-tax  Officer again issued a notice on March 26,\t1963<br \/>\nunder  section\t148 of the new Act in respect  of  the\tvery<br \/>\nassessment which he earlier unsuccessfully sought to  reopen<br \/>\nby  means  of a notice under section 34(1) (a) of  the\t1922<br \/>\nAct.   The  assessee again challenged the  validity  of\t the<br \/>\nnotice\tissued\tto him by means of  another  writ  petition,<br \/>\nbefore\tthe  High Court of Bombay.  The High  Court  quashed<br \/>\nthat  notice on the ground that the Income-tax\tOfficer\t was<br \/>\nnot  competent\tto issue that notice.  It  is  against\tthat<br \/>\ndecision,  the\tpresent appeals have been  brought  to\tthis<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>Section 147 of the 1961 Act provides : If-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (a)   the\t Income-tax  Officer has  reason  to<br \/>\n\t      believe  that,  by reason of the\tomission  or<br \/>\n\t      failure  on the part of an assessee to make  a<br \/>\n\t      return  under Section 139 for  any  assessment<br \/>\n\t      year to the Income-tax Officer or to  disclose<br \/>\n\t      fully  and truly all material facts  necessary<br \/>\n\t      for  his\t&#8216;assessment for\t that  year,  income<br \/>\n\t      chargeable  to tax has escaped assessment\t for<br \/>\n\t      that year, or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (b)   notwithstanding  that there has been  no<br \/>\n\t      omission or failure as mentioned in clause (a)<br \/>\n\t      on  the part of the assessee,  the  Income-tax<br \/>\n\t      Officer has<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t      616<\/span><br \/>\n\t      consequence  of information in his  possession<br \/>\n\t      reason  to believe that income  chargeable  to<br \/>\n\t      tax has escaped assessment for any  assessment<br \/>\n\t      year,<br \/>\n\t      he may, subject to the provisions of  Sections<br \/>\n\t      148 to 153 assess or re-assess such income  or<br \/>\n\t      re-compute   the\tloss  or  the\tdepreciation<br \/>\n\t      allowance,  as  the  case\t may  be,  for\t the<br \/>\n\t      assessment  year\tconcerned  (hereinafter\t  in<br \/>\n\t      Sections\t148  to\t 153  referred\tto  as\t the<br \/>\n\t      relevant assessment year)&#8221;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      Section 148 reads<br \/>\n\t      &#8220;(1)   Before  making  the   assessment,\t re-<br \/>\n\t      assessment  or  re-computation  under  Section<br \/>\n\t      147, the Incometax Officer shall serve on\t the<br \/>\n\t      assessee a notice containing all or any of the<br \/>\n\t      requirements which may\tbe  included  in   a<br \/>\n\t      notice under sub-section. (2)  of section 139;<br \/>\n\t      and the provisions of this Act shall,  so\t far<br \/>\n\t      as may be, apply accordingly as if the  notice<br \/>\n\t      were a notice issued under that sub-section.<br \/>\n\t      (2)   The\t Income-tax  Officer  shall,  before<br \/>\n\t      issuing  any notice under this section  record<br \/>\n\t      his reasons for doing so.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      Section\t149  prescribes the time  limit\t for<br \/>\n\t      issuing  a  notice under\tSection\t 148.\tSub-<br \/>\n\t      section (i) of Section 149 says:<br \/>\n\t      &#8220;No notice under Section 148 shall be issued-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (a)   in\tcases  falling under Clause  (a)  of<br \/>\n\t      Section 147-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (i)   for\t the  relevant assessment  year,  if<br \/>\n\t      eight years have elapsed from the end of\tthat<br \/>\n\t      year,  unless the case falls under  sub-clause\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (ii);(ii);&#8230;.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      Section  297 deals with repeals and savings.<br \/>\n\t      Section  297 2 (d) (ii) reads thus :-<br \/>\n\t      &#8220;Notwithstanding\tthe  repeal  of\t the  Indian<br \/>\n\t      Incometax\t Act 1922 (ii) of 1922\t(hereinafter<br \/>\n\t      referred\t   to  as the repealed\tAct)\t (d)<br \/>\n\t      where in respect\t     of any assessment\tyear<br \/>\n\t      after the year ending on the 31st day of March<br \/>\n\t      1940 :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (i)&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (ii)  any income chargeable to tax had escaped<br \/>\n\t      assessment   within   the\t meaning   of\tthat<br \/>\n\t      expression  in Section 147 and no\t proceedings<br \/>\n\t      under  section  34  of  the  repealed  Act  in<br \/>\n\t      respect of any such<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t      617<\/span><br \/>\n\t      income are pending at the commencement of this<br \/>\n\t      Act,  a notice under Section 148 may,  subject<br \/>\n\t      to the provisions contained in Section 149  or<br \/>\n\t      section  150, be issued with respect  to\tthat<br \/>\n\t      assesment year and all the provisions of\tthis<br \/>\n\t      Act   shall  apply   accordingly&#8221;.   (Emphasis<br \/>\n\t      supplied).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The  only question for decision in these appeals is  whether<br \/>\nthe proceedings initiated by the notice under section  34(1)\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)  of the 1922 Act were pending at the time when  the\t new<br \/>\nAct came into force.  It is not denied that such proceedings<br \/>\nwere  factually pending.  But what was contended by  Mr.  B.<br \/>\nSen, learned counsel for the department was that that notice<br \/>\nbeing  an invalid notice on the ground that that was  barred<br \/>\nby  limitation, the proceedings initiated on basis  of\tthat<br \/>\nnotice should be considered as not pending in the eye of the<br \/>\nlaw.  We are unable to accept this contention.\tWhat section<br \/>\n297  (2)  (a)  (ii) requires is the factual  pendency  of  a<br \/>\nproceeding  under  section  34 of  the\trepealed  Act.\t The<br \/>\nquestion whether that proceeding was barred by limitation or<br \/>\nnot is irrelevant.  It is not denied that those\t proceedings<br \/>\nwere initiated by a competent authority.  Those- proceedings<br \/>\nwere quashed for the reason that notice under section 34  of<br \/>\n1922  Act  was\tissued beyond the time\tprescribed  by\tlaw.<br \/>\nHence it cannot be said that no proceeding under section  34<br \/>\nof  the 1922 Act either factually or legally was pending  at<br \/>\nthe time when the new Act came into force.\n<\/p>\n<p>Our  above conclusion receives support from the decision  of<br \/>\nthis  Court  in\t <a href=\"\/doc\/1874251\/\">Raja Kulkarni and others v.  The  State  of<br \/>\nBombay<\/a>(1).  Therein the question that arose for decision was<br \/>\nwhether\t an  appeal  under  section  24\t of  the  Industrial<br \/>\nDisputes Act, 1950 can be said to have been pending if\tthat<br \/>\nappeal\twas  incompetent or invalid for some  reason.\tThis<br \/>\nCourt ruled that what was necessary was the factual pendency<br \/>\nof  the appeal and not that it should have been a  valid  or<br \/>\ncompetent one under the provisions of the limitation Act  or<br \/>\nsuch other adjectival law.\n<\/p>\n<p>The proceedings pending before a competent authority  cannot<br \/>\nbe said to be not pending merely because that no relief\t can<br \/>\nbe  granted  in\t that  proceedings because  of\tthe  bar  of<br \/>\nlimitation.   <a href=\"\/doc\/168693\/\">In Mela Ram &amp; Sons v. Commissioner  of  Income<br \/>\nTax, Punjab<\/a>(&#8216;:) it was contended before this Court that\t any<br \/>\nappeal which is barred by limitation cannot be considered as<br \/>\nan appeal properly presented under Section 30 of the  Indian<br \/>\nIncome\tTax Act, 1922.\tThis Court rejected that  contention<br \/>\nobserving :\n<\/p>\n<p>(1) [1954] S.C.R. 384.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) 29 I.T.R.  p. 607.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">618<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;it  an  appeal is not presented\twithin\tthat<br \/>\n\t      time  (within the prescribed time)  does\tthat<br \/>\n\t      cease  to\t be  an\t appeal\t as  provided  under<br \/>\n\t      section  30(1) ? It is well  established\tthat<br \/>\n\t      rules  of limitation pertain to the domain  of<br \/>\n\t      adjectival law, and that they operate only  to<br \/>\n\t      bar  the\tremedy\tbut not\t to  extinguish\t the<br \/>\n\t      right.  An appeal preferred in accordance with<br \/>\n\t      Section 30(1) must, therefore, be an appeal in<br \/>\n\t      the  eye of law, though having been  presented<br \/>\n\t      beyond  the period mentioned in section  30(2)<br \/>\n\t      it is liable to be dismissed in limine.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>We have no doubt in our mind that the proceedings  initiated<br \/>\nunder Section 34(1) (a) of the 1922 Act were pending at\t the<br \/>\ntime 1961 Act came into force and that being so the  Income-<br \/>\ntax  Officer  was not competent to issue  any  fresh  notice<br \/>\nunder section 148 of the 1961 Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the result Civil Appeal No. 1301 of 71 fails and the same<br \/>\nis  dismissed  with costs.  Civil Appeal No. 1981 of  68  is<br \/>\ndismissed as not being maintainable.  Parties to bear  their<br \/>\nown costs in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<pre>K.B.N.\t\t\t\t\t\t     Appeals\ndismissed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">619<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 PETITIONER: S. B. JAIN, I.T.O. NAGPUR Vs. RESPONDENT: MAHANDERA DATE OF JUDGMENT07\/09\/1971 BENCH: ACT: Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 297(2)(d)(ii)-Income-tax Act, 1922, S. 34(1)(a)&#8211;Notice under latter Act held beyond time-..If proceedings pending within meaning of s. 297 (2) (d) (ii). HEADNOTE: [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14239","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - 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\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\" \/>\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=\"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-03T10:17:22+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971\",\"datePublished\":\"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-03T10:17:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\"},\"wordCount\":1374,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\",\"name\":\"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-03T10:17:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971\"}]},{\"@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":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - 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\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-03T10:17:22+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971","datePublished":"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-03T10:17:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971"},"wordCount":1374,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971","name":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1971-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-03T10:17:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-b-jain-i-t-o-nagpur-vs-mahandera-on-7-september-1971#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S. B. Jain, I.T.O. Nagpur vs Mahandera on 7 September, 1971"}]},{"@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\/14239","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=14239"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14239\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14239"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14239"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14239"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}