{"id":174258,"date":"2004-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-01-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004"},"modified":"2017-01-08T15:43:27","modified_gmt":"2017-01-08T10:13:27","slug":"concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","title":{"rendered":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai<\/div>\n
Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 2004 (166) ELT 187 Tri Mumbai<\/div>\n
Bench: S T C.<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
C. Satapathy, Member (T) <\/p>\n
1. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The appellants imported 500 kg. of Doxycycline HCL and paid customs duty of Rs. 3,67,682\/- through DEPB credit and additional customs duty of Rs. 2,12,740\/- by cash. The impugned goods were subjected to chemical test in the factory of the appellants at Aurangabad when the same was found to be sub-standard. The Modvat credit of the additional duty was
\nreversed the impugned  goods were re-exported to the supplier.\n<\/p>\n
Subsequently, free replacement was received which was cleared by paying additional duty of Rs. 2,12,483\/- in cash. Since two of the DEPBs had expired by then, credit of Rs. 1,15,261\/- was utilized from another DEPB to pay the customs duty. The appellants filed a refund claim for DEPB amount of Rs. 3,67,682\/- and additional duty of Rs, 2,12,740\/-. The said refund claim has been rejected by the impugned Order-in-Original passed by the Deputy Commissioner stating that there is no provision of refund of debit made under DEPB scheme and that the matter of claim for DEPB re-credit has been dealt and disposed off separately. As regard the claim for refund of the additional duty, the Deputy<\/p>\n
Commissioner has stated that both the importations are independent and
\ntherefore the claim of the appellants that they have paid duty twice on the same consignment is not correct. With these observations, he rejected the refund claim. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has stated as follows :-\n<\/p>\n
“The Asstt. Commissioner in the impugned order has mentioned that the matter of DEPB re-credited claim has been dealt and disposed off separately and hence the impugned appeal is only with regard to the refund claim of Rs. 2,12,270\/- paid as additional duty by the appellants . The appellants’ claim is that the goods were sub-standard and the same was re-exported and its replacement was received by them on which they have paid the duty again. Thus, they are claiming that on the same goods they have paid the duty twice and the department is obliged to refund the duty paid by them on the first occasion. It is observed that the lower authority held that the appellants cleared the imported goods under free shipping bill and that both imports were independent and that the appellants’ claim of paying duty twice on the same consignment is not correct. Further, this is a case of re-export of imported goods found to be sub-standard for clearance from customs and hence this is not a case of refund of duty as provided under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962 and accordingly rejected the refund application<\/p>\n
I am inclined to agree with the view of the lower authority as Section 27 has not been conceived for such a situation and there is a provision under Section 74 of Customs Act, 1962 to take care of such situations.\n<\/p>\n
The appeal is rejected accordingly.”\n<\/p>\n
2. Shri R.K.Thawani, learned consultant appearing for the appellants states that it is permissible to re-export goods imported under DEPB scheme which are defective or unfit for use and that in such cases, 98% of the credit amount debited against the DEPB is required to be generated by the concerned Commissioner of Customs in the form of a certificate and that according to para 7.50A of the Hand Book of procedure 1997-2002, based on such a certificate, the Licensing Authority is
\nretired to grant a fresh DEPB. Shri Thawani also states that the refund of the additional duty is admissible as the duty had been paid twice on the same goods.\n<\/p>\n
3. I have heard Shri Bidhan Chandra, learned D.R. for the department.\n<\/p>\n
4. I find that the relevant Para 7.50A of the Hand Book of Procedure 1997-2002 does allow re-export of defective goods, Against such re-export, the Commissioner of Customs is required to generate a certificate based on which the appellants could have obtained a fresh DEPB from the licensing authority. The para also stipulates that such fresh DEPB shall have the same port of registration and shall be valid for a period equivalent to the balance period of validity of DEPB against which such goods were imported. The appellants themselves have stated that two of the DEPBs had expired by the time the replacement consignment was imported. The said para 7.50A required timely action on the part of all concerned so that a fresh DEPB can be issued within validity period of original DEPB in the case of re-export of defective goods. It does not, however, envisage refund of customs duty as claimed by the appellants against DEPB credit utilised at the time of import.\n<\/p>\n
5. As regards the refund of additional duty, the lower authorities have also rightly concluded that though free replacement of the defective goods imported earlier has been made, both the importations are separate and no refund of the duty is specifically allowed under Section 27 of the Customs Act 1962 in such a situation. As pointed out by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order that on re-export of the first consignment, the appellants could have filed drawback claim but only against the additional duty paid in cash within the time limit available after re-exporting the defective consignments. The appellants have also not shown any notification exempting a replacement consignment from duty.\n<\/p>\n
6. Under the circumstances, there appear to be no ground to interfere with the order passed by the lower authorities. As such the appeal is rejected.\n<\/p>\n
(Pronounced in Court on 29-1-04)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 Equivalent citations: 2004 (166) ELT 187 Tri Mumbai Bench: S T C. ORDER C. Satapathy, Member (T) 1. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The appellants imported 500 kg. of Doxycycline HCL and paid customs […]<\/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":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-174258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nConcept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-08T10:13:27+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-08T10:13:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\"},\"wordCount\":934,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\",\"name\":\"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-08T10:13:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-08T10:13:27+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004","datePublished":"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-08T10:13:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004"},"wordCount":934,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004","name":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-08T10:13:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/concept-pharma-limited-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-29-january-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Concept Pharma Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 January, 2004"}]},{"@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\/174258","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=174258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=174258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=174258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=174258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}