{"id":184895,"date":"2003-11-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-11-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003"},"modified":"2017-08-28T05:03:56","modified_gmt":"2017-08-27T23:33:56","slug":"stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","title":{"rendered":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal &#8211; Mumbai<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2004 (166) ELT 85 Tri Mumbai<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: J Balasundaram, A M Moheb<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>ORDER<\/p>\n<p>Moheb Ali M., Member (T)<\/p>\n<p>1. The  above  appeals  arising  out  of the  order of the Commissioner of Customs Kandla, are taken up for disposal together.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe facts are that M\/s. Satyam Enterprises filed 8 DEEC Shipping Bills before the Customs authorities at Kandla for export of Indian Guargum treated and Pulverised. The exports are sought to be made on behalf of one M\/s. Stonemann Mumbai, who applied for a DEEC licence. On verification the Customs authorities found that M\/s. Stonemann claimed before the Zonal Advance Licensing Committee constituted by the Ministry of Commerce that their end product,<br \/>\nGuargum Pulverised and treated, whould require the following 10 chemicals. The licensing authority granted them to DEEC licence which would entail them to import the chemicals the chemicals are 1 to 10.\n<\/p>\n<pre>(A)     Acrylamide\n \n\n(B)     Dicyandiamide\n \n\n(C)     Ascorbic Acid\n \n\n(D)     Laboratry\/Chemical\/Drug\/reagent Betamethsone\n \n\n(E)\tAmino Acid (L.Lysine)\n \n\n(F)\tGeneral Pesticide\n \n\n(G)\tPrinting Ink.\n \n\n(H)\tHDPE\/DCPE\/LLDPE\/PP\/Moulding\n \n\n(I)\tMultiwall paper sacks with plastics liners\n \n\n(J)      Phenol.\n \n\n<\/pre>\n<p>3.\tSince the 8 shipping bills in question did not indicate that<br \/>\nthe export product did contain the above chemicals they (Shipping Bills)<br \/>\nwere converted into Free Shipping Bills and exports were allowed.<br \/>\nFurther investigation revealed that M\/s. Satyam Enterprises exported the<br \/>\nsame goods under cover of 20 Shipping Bills, for their logged in a DEEC<br \/>\nBook issued along with and another DEEC lincnce No. 03025826 dated<br \/>\n13.10.98. However it was noticed that no import of the entitled<br \/>\nchemicals stated in the licence took place. The Customs authorities<br \/>\nallege that M\/s. Stonemann and M\/s. Satyam Enterprises connived with<br \/>\neach other to defraud the goof of their import duty on the 10 chemicals<br \/>\nmentioned in the DEEC licence had being imported therin and that by<br \/>\nmaking false declaration before the licensing authorities they rendered<br \/>\nthe export goods liable to confiscation and rendered themselves liable to<br \/>\npenal action under Section 114 of the Customs Act,<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe Commissioner confirmed the allegations contained in<br \/>\nthe show cause notice. In the impugned order the Commissioner ordered<br \/>\nde-logging of the 20 Shipping Bills already logged in the DEEC Book,<br \/>\nimposed a penalty of Rs. 1 crore on M\/s. Stonemann, Rs. 50 lakhs on<br \/>\nM\/s. Satyam Enterprises and Rs. 50 lakhs on Shri Mukesh Shah partner<br \/>\nof M\/s. Stonemann.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHeard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThe Commissioner imposes penalties under Section 114 of<br \/>\nthe Customs Act which stipulates that any person who in relation to any<br \/>\ngoods does are omits to do any act which act are omission would render<br \/>\nsuch goods liable to confiscation under Section 113 or abates doing so<br \/>\nor omission of such an act is liable for penalties. In the impugned order<br \/>\nthe Commissioner nowhere has held that the goods sought to be exported<br \/>\nor already exported were liable to confiscation. Such a liability to<br \/>\nconfiscation is vaguely mentioned in the show cause notice but nowhere<br \/>\ndoes the Commissioner in his order give a finding as to whether he holds<br \/>\nthe goods are liable to confiscation at all. Imposition of penalty under<br \/>\nSection 114 of the Customs Act without giving a finding on the liability<br \/>\nof the goods for confiscation cannot be sustained. Secondly, we observe<br \/>\nthat there is no mis-declaration before any customs authorities as to the<br \/>\nactual contents of the goods under exporter. The department holds that<br \/>\nthere was a mis-declaration before the ZALC. There is a separate<br \/>\nenactment in the form of Foreign Trade Regulations Act and Rules made<br \/>\nthere-under to take care of such a situation. The Customs authorities<br \/>\ncannot invoke the provisions of the Customs Act to impose penalties for<br \/>\nsome mis-declaraiton, if any, made before other authorities. In so far as<br \/>\nthe exports are concerned a correct declaration has been made in respect<br \/>\nof the goods. We also observe that the Tribunal in the case of Fitwell<br \/>\nExports Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [1999 (107)<br \/>\nE.L.T. 221 (Tribunal)] held that it is not a condition at the time of export<br \/>\nthat the components in the case of which the benefit is claimed later had<br \/>\nto be incorporated in the export document. The Tribunal also held that if<br \/>\nthe customs authorities were to suspect that the exporter would be entitled to un-entitled benefits they should take care to either inform the licensing authorities or to log the DEEC Book. It is not open to the Customs to invoke the provisions of Section 114 of the Act, where no offence under the Customs Act, in so far as the export goods are concerned is committed. We also notice that the Commissioner imposed separate penalties on the partnership firm M\/s. Stonemann and its partner.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe Commissioner&#8217;s order in so far as it related to the penalties imposed on the appellants is set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tAll the three appeals are allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Pronounced in Court)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal &#8211; Mumbai Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 Equivalent citations: 2004 (166) ELT 85 Tri Mumbai Bench: J Balasundaram, A M Moheb ORDER Moheb Ali M., Member (T) 1. The above appeals arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs [&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":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-184895","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - 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\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-27T23:33:56+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-27T23:33:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\"},\"wordCount\":793,\"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\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\",\"name\":\"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-27T23:33:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - 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\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-27T23:33:56+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003","datePublished":"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-27T23:33:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003"},"wordCount":793,"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\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003","name":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-27T23:33:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/stonemann-marble-mukesh-shah-and-vs-commissioner-of-customs-on-14-november-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Stonemann Marble, Mukesh Shah And &#8230; vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 November, 2003"}]},{"@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\/184895","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=184895"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/184895\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=184895"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=184895"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=184895"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}