{"id":184918,"date":"2010-09-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010"},"modified":"2018-12-20T01:19:56","modified_gmt":"2018-12-19T19:49:56","slug":"murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Patna High Court &#8211; Orders<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n                              MISC. APPEAL No.339 of 2009\n                                         WITH\n                     INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 524 of 2010\n\n              ====================================================\n              MURRAH LIVI STOCK AGENCY THROUGH ITS PARTNER\n              SANDEEP MALLICK\n                                  Versus\n                      DEPUTY COMM.OF INCOME TAX\n              ====================================================\n              Appearance :\n              For the Appellant:  Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Senior Advocate with\n                                  Mr. Kamal Deo Sharma, Advocate\n              For the Respondent: Mrs. Archana Sinha, Advocate\n              ====================================================\n              CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n                       and\n                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN\n\n              ORAL ORDER<\/pre>\n<p>              (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)<\/p>\n<p>6.   20.9.2010.      Interlocutory Application No. 524 of 2010: &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                                   This application under Section 5 of the<br \/>\n                     Limitation Act is made by the appellant-assessee for<br \/>\n                     condonation of delay of one year four months and 19<br \/>\n                     days occurred in filing the above Miscellaneous Appeal.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                                   Learned Advocate Mrs. Archana Sinha has<br \/>\n                     appeared for the respondent department. She has<br \/>\n                     contested the application. She has submitted that the<br \/>\n                     delay is deliberate.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                                   It transpires that at the time the impugned<br \/>\n                     order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was made<br \/>\n                     on 22nd June 2007, the Miscellaneous Appeal No. 266 of<br \/>\n                     2004 in respect of the same assessment year was pending<br \/>\n                     before this Court. After decision in the Miscellaneous<br \/>\n                     Appeal was rendered on 28th November 2007 the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                  -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>assessee approached the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court. After<br \/>\nthe matter before the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court was<br \/>\nwithdrawn on 16th January 2009 with liberty to file<br \/>\nappeal before the High Court, time was consumed in<br \/>\nreconstructing the papers as averred in paragraph 7 of the<br \/>\napplication.\n<\/p>\n<p>               We are unable to accept that the delay in<br \/>\nquestion was deliberate. Definitely the assessee did not<br \/>\nstand to gain by delaying the matter nor the assessee was<br \/>\nindolent.\n<\/p>\n<p>               We are of the opinion that the appellant has<br \/>\nmade out sufficient cause for condoning the delay. The<br \/>\ndelay in filing the Miscellaneous Appeal is condoned.\n<\/p>\n<p>               The     Interlocutory   Application   stands<br \/>\ndisposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>Miscellaneous Appeal No. 339 of 2009: &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>               The appeal be posted for hearing under<br \/>\nOrder 41 Rule 11 C.P.C. on the following questions of<br \/>\nlaw and on the questions of law which may be raised at<br \/>\nthe time of hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>    (i)        Whether the Tribunal can justify and<br \/>\n               sustain the action of the Assessing<br \/>\n               Officer under Section 147 of the Act in<br \/>\n               having reason to believe that income<br \/>\n               liable to tax had escaped assessment<br \/>\n               solely on basis of lodging of First<br \/>\n               Information   Report    in   which    the<br \/>\n               Appellant had not even been named, on<br \/>\n               the ground that public opinion, however<br \/>\n               uninformed, had a bearing on his mind<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">            -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       and that the Assessing Officer was under<br \/>\n       obligation to take note of public opinion,<br \/>\n       however uninformed, and Act?\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)   Whether or not &#8216;reason to believe&#8217; to<br \/>\n       justify action under Section 147 and 148<br \/>\n       of the Act can be based on mere omnibus<br \/>\n       allegations made in and First Information<br \/>\n       Report unsubstantiated by any prima<br \/>\n       facie     credible    information     or    any<br \/>\n       materials in support of it and bereft of<br \/>\n       even      rudimentary     details     of    such<br \/>\n       allegations?\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) Whether or not the omnibus allegations in<br \/>\n       a    First     Information     Report,       not<br \/>\n       substantiated against the Appellant even<br \/>\n       after     lengthy    investigations    by    the<br \/>\n       Central Bureau of Investigations, as<br \/>\n       evident from the Charge Sheet dated<br \/>\n       17.1.2000 submitted in RC 55(A)\/96 Pat<br \/>\n       not naming the Appellant or its partners<br \/>\n       as accused sent up for trial, can be the<br \/>\n       basis for the Assessing Officer and the<br \/>\n       Ld. Tribunal to justify order under<br \/>\n       Section 147 of the Act against the<br \/>\n       Appellant and to sustain such orders<br \/>\n       against it?\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)   Whether or not the Ld. Tribunal is<br \/>\n       justified to finally conclude and uphold<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">          -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       action under Section 147 of the Act and<br \/>\n       an assessment of income under Section<br \/>\n       143(3)\/147 of the Act made merely on<br \/>\n       the     basis       of      unproven       and<br \/>\n       unsubstantiated allegations made in the<br \/>\n       First Information Report without holding<br \/>\n       any independent enquiry whatsoever or<br \/>\n       an iota of any evidence being brought on<br \/>\n       record assuming the Appellant guilty,<br \/>\n       even    after    the     Police   Investigation<br \/>\n       concluded       without     finding   anything<br \/>\n       against the Appellant?\n<\/p>\n<p>(v)    Whether or not notice under Section 148<br \/>\n       of the Act is contrary to and in violation<br \/>\n       of the provisions of Section 149 of the<br \/>\n       Act and as such void and barred as it has<br \/>\n       admittedly been issued more than eight<br \/>\n       years after the end of the relevant<br \/>\n       assessment year and the Order under<br \/>\n       Section 147 does not state that the<br \/>\n       income chargeable to tax which had<br \/>\n       escaped assessment was amounting to<br \/>\n       Rs.1,00,000\/- or was likely to amount of<br \/>\n       Rs.1,00,000\/- or more for that year?\n<\/p>\n<p>(vi)   Whether or not, the Ld. Tribunal has<br \/>\n       acted in accordance with law in coming<br \/>\n       to conclusions for Assessment year in<br \/>\n       question on the basis of facts relevant to<br \/>\n       subsequent Assessment year?\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">          -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>(vii) Whether or not the acts of the omission or<br \/>\n       commission of others can be held against<br \/>\n       the appellants and action\/assessment<br \/>\n       under Section 147 of the Act taken<br \/>\n       against the Appellants on that basis?\n<\/p>\n<p>(viii) Whether or not provisions of Section 147<br \/>\n       of the Act postulates a rational and<br \/>\n       intelligible nexus between the reason and<br \/>\n       the belief emanating from the said reason<br \/>\n       being based on some material and not<br \/>\n       mere pretence for issuance of notice<br \/>\n       under Section 148 of the Act?\n<\/p>\n<p>(ix)   Whether the Ld. Tribunal in disposing of<br \/>\n       the appeal in the manner done committed<br \/>\n       gross error leading to miscarriage of<br \/>\n       justice in failing to consider and decide<br \/>\n       whether in case of a particular trade,<br \/>\n       albeit an illegal one, the norms and usual<br \/>\n       expenses of that business are applicable<br \/>\n       and allowable or not?\n<\/p>\n<p>(x)    Whether the Ld. Tribunal was justified or<br \/>\n       not in not considering and deciding<br \/>\n       objectively whether the stand of the<br \/>\n       Revenue that the onus of proof to prove<br \/>\n       expenses, even which had already been<br \/>\n       proved after due enquiries during regular<br \/>\n       assessment under Section 143(3) of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                    -6-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                 Act, lay on the Appellant and that he was<br \/>\n                 required to again produce the letters of<br \/>\n                 confirmation or purchases and expenses<br \/>\n                 even after the long lapse of time ignoring<br \/>\n                 the confirmations on record?\n<\/p>\n<p>          (xi)   Whether the Ld. Tribunal erred in failing<br \/>\n                 to appreciate that validity of order under<br \/>\n                 Section 147 of Act and Notice under<br \/>\n                 Section 148 of the Act are to be judged<br \/>\n                 on basis of records\/information available<br \/>\n                 with the Assessing Officer at the time of<br \/>\n                 passing of such order\/issuance of such<br \/>\n                 notice and not on basis of subsequent<br \/>\n                 orders passed by him?\n<\/p>\n<p>          (xii) Whether     or   not   the   materials   and<br \/>\n                 evidence brought on record and duly<br \/>\n                 verified and found correct earlier remains<br \/>\n                 part of the records during proceedings<br \/>\n                 under Section 143(3)\/147 of the Act?\n<\/p>\n<p>                         (R.M. Doshit, CJ)<\/p>\n<p>                          (Jyoti Saran, J)<br \/>\nPawan\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Patna High Court &#8211; Orders Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MISC. APPEAL No.339 of 2009 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 524 of 2010 ==================================================== MURRAH LIVI STOCK AGENCY THROUGH ITS PARTNER SANDEEP MALLICK Versus DEPUTY COMM.OF INCOME [&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":[8,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-184918","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court-orders"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - 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\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-19T19:49:56+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=\"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\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-19T19:49:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1019,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court - Orders\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-19T19:49:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - 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\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-19T19:49:56+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-19T19:49:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010"},"wordCount":1019,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court - Orders"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010","name":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its ... vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-19T19:49:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murrah-live-stock-agency-thru-its-vs-deputy-comm-of-income-tax-on-20-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Murrah Live Stock Agency Thru. Its &#8230; vs Deputy Comm.Of Income Tax on 20 September, 2010"}]},{"@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\/184918","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=184918"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/184918\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=184918"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=184918"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=184918"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}