{"id":151321,"date":"2001-11-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-11-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001"},"modified":"2017-12-23T17:58:02","modified_gmt":"2017-12-23T12:28:02","slug":"james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","title":{"rendered":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2003 129 STC 338 Ker<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M Ramchandran<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: M Ramachandran<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>M. Ramchandran, J.<\/p>\n<p>1. The impact of Section 30B of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the procedural<br \/>\nformalities to be observed in the penalty proceedings initiated under Section 45A of the<br \/>\nKerala General Sales Tax Act are requested to be examined in the present Original<br \/>\nPetition which is field by an assessee under the Sales Tax Act. Petition is engaged<br \/>\nin the proprietary business of dealing in plastic furniture at Valara in Idukki District.<br \/>\nOn 16.8.2001, a notice had been issued to him by the Agricultural Income Tax and<br \/>\nSales Tax Officer, Adimali initiating him that it has come to his notice that few<br \/>\nconsignments, sent by M\/s. National Flask Industries Ltd., Silvassa and G. Sarma<br \/>\nCorporation, Mumbai in the name of the petitioner during 1999 had not been accounted<br \/>\nby him and therefore, it had been decided to impose penalty under Section 45A of the<br \/>\nK.G.S.T. Act. A copy of the notice is produced as Ext. P1. Petitioner claims that he<br \/>\nhad filed objection thereto showing that as regards the consignment of M\/s. National<br \/>\nFlask Industries Ltd. the purchase did not materialise as goods were returned since<br \/>\nthey were defective, and debit note had been issued to the sellers during August, 1999. In<br \/>\nrespect of six consignments which are alleged to have been sent by M\/s. Sarma<br \/>\nCorporation valued Rs. 8,53,538\/-, the petitioner and taken a stand that he had not<br \/>\neffected any such purchase and had no information about the consignment. He<br \/>\ntherefore had required the Sales Tax Officer to give him details of the consignment<br \/>\nand the address of the alleged supplier. The complaint of the petitioner is that ignoring<br \/>\nthe above, penalty proceedings have been finalised wherein he is made liable to pay<br \/>\nan amount Rs. 1,97,580\/- being double the amount of tax calculated as evaded.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. The Government Pleader had opposed the allegations and claims of the<br \/>\npetitioner. He had submitted that an opportunity had been given to the petitioner to<br \/>\nrespond, but no objection had been received within the time notified and proceedings<br \/>\nwere therefore finalised. He also points out that the petitioner has got an effective<br \/>\nremedy by way of revision, and for this reason also, the Original Petition is not entertainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. Advocate Sri. Thanu Pillai, appearing for the petitioner, submits that even if<br \/>\nthe explanation was received late, that was very much in the possession of the Officer<br \/>\nbefore he had finalised the proceedings, and the technical approach never was justified.<br \/>\nHe had also heavily relied on the methodology adopted in arriving at the conclusion<br \/>\nthat he had evaded tax. The counsel had brought pointed attention to Ext. P7 Circular<br \/>\nNo. 19\/88 dated 14.12.1988 which governs the modalities in respect of declarations<br \/>\ncollected at the check posts. The Government Pleader was right in pointing out that<br \/>\npetitioner has remedy by way of revision, but according to him, the Writ Petition was<br \/>\nfiled as there was total arbitrariness.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. I am of the view that the Original Petition is not to be entertained as the<br \/>\npetitioner can approach the revisional authority to ventilate his grievances. I am sure<br \/>\nthat the defence placed will be examined by the revisional authority had appropriate<br \/>\norders passed. The counsel for the petitioners justified in submitting that the explanation<br \/>\nfurnished could not have been abjectly ignored. True, the assessee is expected to<br \/>\nutilise the opportunity with diligence, but nothing prevents the Officer from taking note<br \/>\nof the explanations if they reach him before the final adjudication is attempted.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. Since the counsel has heavily relies on Ext.P7, Sections 30B and 45A of the Act,<br \/>\nbefore leaving the matter I feel it is appropriate that the above also be subjected to<br \/>\nexamination.\n<\/p>\n<p>6. The submission is that the first respondent has to oversee the functioning of<br \/>\nthe Department ad take earnest effort for a house cleaning programme. According<br \/>\nto the petitioner, he has a right to suggest the above as he has become a victim due to<br \/>\nthe lethargy of the officialdom. The minimum to be done is to ensure that the provisions<br \/>\nof the statute are strictly followed. In his endeavour, Advocate Sri. Thanu Pillai had<br \/>\nreferred to Section 30B of the Act which had been brought into force with effect from<br \/>\n25.11.1988. When a vehicle carrying goods form any place outside the State and<br \/>\nbound for any place outside the State passes through the Kerala State, the owner or driver or person in charge of the vehicle are obliged to obtain transit passes in the<br \/>\nprescribed form. Sub-section 4 provides as following:-\n<\/p>\n<p> &#8220;(4) Where any person consigns any goods or transports any goods from another State<br \/>\ninto the State and where the particulars furnished in the declaration prescribed n Clause (b) of<br \/>\nSub-section(2) of Section 29 are false or the consignor or purchaser stated therein is found to be bogus or<br \/>\nnonexistent or is not traceable or denies such purchase, it shall, unless the consignor or the owner<br \/>\nof the vehicle or the person in charge of the vehicle proves to the satisfaction of the assessing<br \/>\nauthority that the particulars furnished in the declaration are true, be presumed that such goods<br \/>\nwhich are liable to tax under this Act have been sold in the State by the Consignor or the owner<br \/>\nof the goods or the owner or driver or person in charge of the vehicle or the person in charge<br \/>\nof the goods or all of them jointly and they shall be jointly or severally liable to pay tax on such<br \/>\nsales which shall be assessed and recovered in the manner provided in Sub-section (3).&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>7. From the check post reports, it is clear that substantial consignments had<br \/>\nentered the State&#8217;s boundary, and the petitioner is shown as the consignee. The<br \/>\npetitioner emphatically submits that he had denied such purchase and it was the duty<br \/>\nof the Department to see whether there was observance of the responsibilities that<br \/>\nare expected from a dealer. It ought not have been permissible to ignore the statutory<br \/>\nprescriptions and proceed against innocent assessee. It is further submitted that<br \/>\nimproper handling and forwarding of sales tax declarations expected to be collected at the check post and the delay in processing them was causing headache to honest<br \/>\nassessees. Therefore had reconciliation form month to month as initially contemplated<br \/>\ngot exercise, there would have been no possibility for heartburn as presently<br \/>\nexperiences. Reference to Ext. P7 had been made in the aforesaid context.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. It is obvious that if the grievances highlighted are real, it do present a dismissal management of the affairs. The wisdom behind Circular No. 19\/88 dated 14.12.1988<br \/>\ncannot but be emphasised. They operate to the advantage of the Revenue as well as<br \/>\nconfer relief to the assessee. The misuse of declaration obtained, according to the petitioner, had resulted in the penalty being imposed on him. Though it is too premature<br \/>\nfor this Court to pronounce upon the point, the circular has pointed out that laxity may<br \/>\ndestroy the very purpose for which the check posts are established. The circular has<br \/>\nfurther laid down the instructions to minimise the possible malpractices. The Sales<br \/>\nTax Inspectors of the Intelligence Wing are expected to take down extracts of<br \/>\ntransported goods and cross verify it with consignee dealers. This is expected to be<br \/>\nreviewed by the Deputy Commissioner, every month, and the proceedings in turn are<br \/>\nto be forwarded to higher authorities. These procedural safeguards would not only be<br \/>\nto the advantage of the Department for asserting themselves, but will also be welcomed<br \/>\nby assessees whose names every often are alleged to be misused by unscrupulous<br \/>\npersons. The petitioner has rightly pointed out to his predicament, viz., that, during<br \/>\n2001, it has bene threatened that the declarations made in 1999 are decide to be used<br \/>\nagainst him. This practice, at least in certain cases may work out prejudice.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. It has to be noticed that under Section 30B of the K.G.S.T. Act, for the purpose of<br \/>\nthe section, the owner or driver of person in charge of the vehicle and the vessel shall,<br \/>\neven if not registered under the Act, be deemed to be a registered dealer for the<br \/>\nassessment of tax under the Act. Counsel also invited my attention to Rule 57 of the<br \/>\nKerala General Sales Tax Rules which mandated operator of a vehicle or vessel to<br \/>\nsubmit to the assessing authority the copies of bill of sale, deliver-notice, way bill,<br \/>\ncertificate etc., regarding the ownership of the goods giving details of delivery and<br \/>\nduly signed by purchaser, consignee. It is their obligation to submit such reports every<br \/>\nmonth. Likewise, the necessity for submission of returns by forwarding agency and<br \/>\nclearing house etc., prescribed under Rule 58 and the obligation of banks and other<br \/>\ninstitutions to forward every month returns showing the bills relating to goods discounted,<br \/>\ncleared and negotiated through their branches indicated that there was no dearth of<br \/>\nstatutory provisions. It may be only a failure to enforce such duties appropriately and<br \/>\nin a timely manner, and of course in effective supervision.\n<\/p>\n<p>10. I therefore direct that if there is no obedience made to he statutory provision<br \/>\nand circular, relating to declarations and returns, the second respondent should see<br \/>\nthat expeditious steps are taken for obvious reasons for enforcement of the same.<br \/>\nFacts f this case prima facie, show that there has been lethargy on the part of the<br \/>\nDepartmental Officers. At least, till such time the check posts exist and the present<br \/>\ntaxation system is in vogue, it has to be ensured that the system as envisaged works.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. In view of the statutory remedy available, in this Original Petition, I decline to<br \/>\ngrant relief to the petitioner. The revision, if filed within one month should be entertained<br \/>\nas filed within time. I also make ti clear that enforcement of penalty proceedings will<br \/>\nstand suspended fro a period of one month and it will be appropriate for the revisional<br \/>\nauthority to examine the applications for interlocutory orders as and when that are made in the revisional proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>12. The Original petition is closed with the above observation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001 Equivalent citations: 2003 129 STC 338 Ker Author: M Ramchandran Bench: M Ramachandran JUDGMENT M. Ramchandran, J. 1. The impact of Section 30B of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act and the procedural formalities to be observed in the penalty [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-151321","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - 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\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-23T12:28:02+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-23T12:28:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1698,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\",\"name\":\"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-23T12:28:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - 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\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-23T12:28:02+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001","datePublished":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-23T12:28:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001"},"wordCount":1698,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001","name":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales ... on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-23T12:28:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-agricultural-income-tax-and-sales-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"James vs Agricultural Income Tax And Sales &#8230; on 22 November, 2001"}]},{"@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\/151321","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=151321"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/151321\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=151321"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=151321"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=151321"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}