{"id":158707,"date":"2011-04-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011"},"modified":"2017-09-29T12:19:39","modified_gmt":"2017-09-29T06:49:39","slug":"commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Harsha Devani,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable H.B.Antani,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nTAXAP\/637\/2010\t 6\/ 6\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nTAX\nAPPEAL No. 637 of 2010\n \n\n \n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nCOMMISSIONER\nOF CUSTOMS - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nADANI\nWILMAR LIMITED - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMS\nAMEE YAJNIK for\nAppellant \nNone for Opponent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 19\/01\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)<\/p>\n<p>This<br \/>\n\tappeal under section 130G of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act) has<br \/>\n\tbeen preferred by the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla against common<br \/>\n\torder dated 4.2.2009 made by the Customs, Excise &amp; Service Tax<br \/>\n\tAppellate Tribunal (the Tribunal), in 13 appeals. In the<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, the present appeal is treated as an appeal filed in<br \/>\n\trelation to Appeal No.C\/1317 of 2005 only.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tappellant, has challenged the impugned order of the Tribunal by<br \/>\n\tproposing the following questions:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;[a]\tWhether<br \/>\n\tthe Tribunal was correct in holding that the refund claims can be<br \/>\n\tfiled without challenging the assessment amounts to challenging the<br \/>\n\tassessment or otherwise?\n<\/p>\n<p>[b]\tWhether<br \/>\n\tthe Tribunal was correct to hold that the filing of refund claim<br \/>\n\teven before the final assessment amounts to challenging the<br \/>\n\tassessment or otherwise?\n<\/p>\n<p>[c]\tWhether<br \/>\n\tthe Tribunal was correct to uphold Commissioner (A) order containing<br \/>\n\tdirection to serve the copy of final assessment order to importer,<br \/>\n\tif the same has not been done by the Department, awaiting decision<br \/>\n\tin the present case, and directing to serve the same now on receipt<br \/>\n\tof order to enable to challenge the same before appropriate forum by<br \/>\n\tthe importer?\n<\/p>\n<p>[d]\tWhether<br \/>\n\tin the facts and circumstances of the mentioned above, the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\n\tTribunal was right in law by disposing the appeal of appellant or<br \/>\n\totherwise?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tfacts of the case stated briefly are that the respondent assessee<br \/>\n\timported Crude Palmolein\/oil and other oil in bulk and filed 13<br \/>\n\tbills of entry for clearance of the same. The ullage quantity being<br \/>\n\tmore than the quantity shown in the bill of lading, duty was paid on<br \/>\n\tthe ullage quantity. Subsequently, out turn (shore tank)<br \/>\n\treports showed that the oil received in each case was less than the<br \/>\n\tquantity in the respective ullage report, on which duty was<br \/>\n\tinitially paid. The Board vide circular No.96\/2002-Cus. dated<br \/>\n\t27.2.2002 clarified that in case of bulk liquid imports, the shore<br \/>\n\ttank received quantity should be taken as basis for levy of customs<br \/>\n\tduty and the provisional assessment should be finalized accordingly.<br \/>\n\tOn the basis of the above Circular, the assessee filed refund claims<br \/>\n\tin respect of the excess duty paid by it. Subsequently, the<br \/>\n\tprovisional assessments were finalized on 22.4.2003 by taking the<br \/>\n\tullage quantity into consideration. The original adjudicating<br \/>\n\tauthority, while dealing with the claims filed by the assessee,<br \/>\n\texamined the relevant facts including unjust enrichment angle and<br \/>\n\tsanctioned the refund claims. The revenue preferred appeals before<br \/>\n\tthe Commissioner (Appeals), who disposed of the appeals by setting<br \/>\n\taside the orders sanctioning refund. However, the Commissioner<br \/>\n\t(Appeals) was of the view that injustice and impropriety had been<br \/>\n\tcommitted by the lower authority in not giving notice to the<br \/>\n\trespondent before finalizing the assessments and in not<br \/>\n\tcommunicating the final assessment orders in writing to the<br \/>\n\trespondent. He, therefore, directed the lower authority to<br \/>\n\tcommunicate to the respondent, in writing, the final assessment<br \/>\n\torders, in case the assessee may like to challenge the assessments<br \/>\n\tin accordance with law. Against the said order, the respondent &#8211;<br \/>\n\tassessee preferred second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal<br \/>\n\tnoted that there was no dispute about the assessee&#8217;s entitlement to<br \/>\n\tthe claims<br \/>\n\ton merits. The only objection raised by the revenue was that, the<br \/>\n\tfinal assessment orders had not been challenged. Referring to the<br \/>\n\torder of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Tribunal noted that the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner (Appeals) had not rejected the refund claims in its<br \/>\n\ttotality on the ground of non-challenge of assessed bills of entry,<br \/>\n\tbut had very judiciously directed the revenue authorities to serve a<br \/>\n\tcopy of the assessed bill of entry to the assessee so as to enable<br \/>\n\tit to challenge the same. The Tribunal noted that there was no<br \/>\n\tdispute about the merits of the case and the assessee had already<br \/>\n\tbeen given an opportunity of challenging the assessment order, which<br \/>\n\twas only a procedural and technical aspect, and upheld the order of<br \/>\n\tCommissioner (Appeals) containing directions to serve copy of the<br \/>\n\tassessed bills of entry to the assessee, observing that if the same<br \/>\n\thad not been done by the revenue, awaiting decision in the present<br \/>\n\tappeal the same may be served now on receipt of the order and shall<br \/>\n\tbe challenged by the assessee before the appropriate forum.<br \/>\n\tThereafter the refunds claim in dispute, shall be decided.\n<\/p>\n<p>Ms.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAmee Yajnik, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of<br \/>\n\tthe appellant has assailed the impugned order of the Tribunal by<br \/>\n\tplacing reliance on the grounds stated in the memo of appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>From<br \/>\n\tthe facts noted hereinabove, it is clear that the refund claims<br \/>\n\tsanctioned in favour of the assessee have been set aside by the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner (Appeals) on the<br \/>\n\tground that the final assessment orders had not been challenged by<br \/>\n\tthe assessee. It is also an admitted position that at the relevant<br \/>\n\ttime, final assessment orders had not been served upon the assessee.<br \/>\n\tIn the circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals), while setting<br \/>\n\taside the sanctioned refund claims, has taken care of the situation<br \/>\n\tby directing that the orders of final assessment be served upon the<br \/>\n\tassessee so as to enable the assessee to challenge the same, if it<br \/>\n\tso desires and file refund claim thereafter. The Tribunal has merely<br \/>\n\tendorsed the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals). As noted<br \/>\n\tearlier, it was the assessee who had preferred appeals against the<br \/>\n\torder of Commissioner (Appeals) before the Tribunal. The revenue had<br \/>\n\taccepted the order made by the Commissioner (Appeals). As such, when<br \/>\n\tthe Tribunal has merely endorsed the view taken by the Commissioner<br \/>\n\t(Appeals), the revenue cannot be permitted to challenge the same as<br \/>\n\tit would indirectly amount to challenging the order made by the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner (Appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tany view of the matter, the approach adopted by the Commissioner<br \/>\n\t(Appeals) is a judicious one, whereby while setting aside the orders<br \/>\n\tsanctioning the refund claims, he has taken care to see that no<br \/>\n\tinjustice is done to the assessee and has merely directed the lower<br \/>\n\tauthority to provide copies of the final assessment orders to the<br \/>\n\tassessee so as to enable it to challenge the same if it so deemed<br \/>\n\tfit. The Tribunal has merely reiterated the view taken by the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner<br \/>\n\t(Appeals). Moreover, revenue has succeeded in its appeals before the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal, in the assessee&#8217;s<br \/>\n\tappeals, has not disturbed the order passed by the Commissioner<br \/>\n\t(Appeals), whereby the orders sanctioning the refund claims have<br \/>\n\tbeen set aside. In the circumstances, merely because the lower<br \/>\n\tauthority has been directed to furnish copies of the final<br \/>\n\tassessment orders, which it was even otherwise duty bound to<br \/>\n\tfurnish, and it is left open to the assessee to file refund claims<br \/>\n\tthereafter, is no reason for the revenue to feel aggrieved. In the<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, even on merits, the appeal is devoid of any merit.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe light of the aforesaid, in the absence of any legal infirmity in<br \/>\n\tthe impugned order of the Tribunal, the same does not give rise to<br \/>\n\tany question of law, much less, a substantial question of law so as<br \/>\n\tto warrant any interference. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>[HARSHA<br \/>\nDEVANI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>[H.B.ANTANI,<br \/>\nJ.]<\/p>\n<p>parmar*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 Author: Harsha Devani,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable H.B.Antani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAP\/637\/2010 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 637 of 2010 ========================================= COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS &#8211; Appellant(s) Versus ADANI WILMAR LIMITED &#8211; Opponent(s) ========================================= Appearance : MS [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-158707","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-29T06:49:39+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\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T06:49:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1211,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\",\"name\":\"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T06:49:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-29T06:49:39+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\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011","datePublished":"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T06:49:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011"},"wordCount":1211,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011","name":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-04-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T06:49:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-the-on-15-april-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner vs The on 15 April, 2011"}]},{"@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\/158707","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=158707"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158707\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=158707"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=158707"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=158707"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}