{"id":223257,"date":"2011-08-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4"},"modified":"2016-08-17T22:54:50","modified_gmt":"2016-08-17T17:24:50","slug":"commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Harsha Devani, H.B.Antani,<\/div>\n
  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\/966\/2009\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. 966 of 2009\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nCOMMISSIONER\nOF INCOME TAX-VI - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nINTERNATIONAL\nSTEEL CORPORATION - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nMR BHATT, SR. ADVOCATE with MRS MAUNA M BHATT\nfor Appellant \nNone for\nOpponent(s) : 1, \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: 27\/12\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)<\/p>\n
1.\t\tIn
\nthis appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act),
\nthe appellant-revenue has challenged the order dated 8.8.2008 made by
\nthe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal), proposing the
\nfollowing two questions :\n<\/p>\n
[A]\tWhether
\non the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate
\nTribunal erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs.10 lacs
\nconfirmed by the CIT (A) on account of unexplained credits appearing
\nin the accounts of the assessee, without appreciating that the
\nassessee could not discharge the onus which lay upon it of
\nestablishing the genuineness of the said credit entries?\n<\/p>\n
[B]\tWhether
\nthe Appellate Tribunal was justified in observing that the revenue
\nfailed to establish any relation between the assessee and the
\n“Darbar”, without properly appraising the evidence on
\nrecord in the form of account of “Darbar” in the books of
\nlate Shri Mahendra H. Shah which clearly showed that cheques were
\nissued in the name of “International Steel” by depositing
\ncash amounts of Rs.7 lacs and Rs.3 lacs in the said bogus account of
\n“Darbar”?”\n<\/p>\n
2.\t\tThe
\nassessment period is the block period 1.4.1989 to 7.12.1999.  The
\nassessee is engaged in the business of ship breaking. A search under
\nsection 132(1) of the Act came to be conducted in the case of Mr.
\nMahendra H. Shah, Mr. Hemant Shah and their associates (Madhupuri
\nGroup). During the course of search and post search inquiries, it was
\nfound that late Mr. Mahendra H. Shah was indulging in the activity of
\nissuing accommodative entries of loan and purchase\/sale to various
\nparties against receipt of cash from them. While examining the books
\nseized during the course of search, it was found that entries had
\nbeen obtained by the assessee concern also. Proceedings under section
\n158BD of the Act came to be initiated against the assessee. The
\nAssessing Officer framed assessment under section 158BC read with
\n158BD of the Act determining the total undisclosed income of the
\nassessee at Rs.44,13,657\/-. The assessee partly succeeded in its
\nappeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who deleted the addition
\nmade the Assessing Officer in respect of loans other than the loan of
\nRs.10 lacs shown in the account of ‘Darbar’ and additions
\non account of interest and commission in respect thereof out of the
\ntotal income of Rs.44,13,657\/- Being aggrieved, both the assessee as
\nwell the revenue preferred appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal
\nvide its order dated 08.08.2008, dismissed the appeal preferred by
\nthe revenue and partly allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t\tThe
\npresent appeal arises out of the appeal preferred by the assessee
\nbefore the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
4.\t\tDuring
\nthe course of search certain material was recovered, which included
\ncopy of account of ‘Darbar’. The copy of the account  of
\n‘Darbar’ which formed part of the assessment order as
\nAnnexure “A” showed that the assessee had taken two
\ncheques of Rs.5 lacs on 25.8.1999 and that cash of Rs.7 lacs was paid
\non 25.8.1999 and Rs.3 lacs was paid on 26.8.1999. There were other
\nentries in the said account, which did not pertain to the assessee.
\nThe said cheques transactions were reflected in the account of
\nMadhupuri Corporation for the financial year 1999-2000 in the books
\nof the assessee as loans received from Madhupuri Corporation. The
\naccount of ‘Darbar’ revealed that the said account had
\nbeen squared up in the books of Shri Mahendra H. Shah. The Assessing
\nOfficer was of the view that the possibility of ‘Darbar’
\nadvancing money to Shri Mahendra H. Shah who in turn advanced the
\nsame to the assessee, was ruled out.  That, it was clear from the
\naccount that cash had been deposited by ‘Darbar’ on
\nbehalf of the assessee to whom cheques of the same amount had been
\nissued.\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tThe
\nCommissioner (Appeals) was of the view that in respect of the entries
\nof cheques of Rs.5 lacs, against which entries of cash of Rs.7 lacs
\nand Rs.3 lacs were reflected in the same account, the onus was on the
\nassessee to prove that such entries of cash deposit did not pertain
\nto it and pertained to somebody else and it had no connection
\nwhatsoever with the entries of cash deposits.  The Commissioner
\n(Appeals) was of the view that the assessee had not discharged the
\nsaid onus and held that the assessee was not able to explain
\nsatisfactorily loans of Rs.10 lacs and accordingly, confirmed the
\naddition made on account of such loans and also disallowed the
\ninterest in respect thereto.\n<\/p>\n
6.\t\tIn
\nappeal, the Tribunal, upon appreciation of the evidence on record,
\nfound that the revenue has not established any relation between the
\nassessee and ‘Darbar’ which was very much necessary to
\nimplicate the assessee. The Tribunal further found that proceedings
\nunder section 158BD of the Act had been initiated against the
\nassessee on the basis of post search inquiries carried out by the
\nDDIT from the assessee itself and not on the basis of the
\nmaterial\/evidence gathered during the search.  It was noted that the
\nlearned Departmental Representative could not pinpoint any seized
\nmaterial indicating that the assessee had taken any accommodative
\nentry of loan from Shri M. H. Shah and his associates or paid any
\ncash to any person in exchange of cheques. According to the Tribunal,
\nthe burden of showing that the assessee had undisclosed income was on
\nthe revenue. The said burden could not be discharged merely by
\nreferring to a general statement given by a third party without
\nalluding to the assessee that cash was received from him in lieu of
\nloans and making such a statement the sole foundation for the
\nassessment.  The Tribunal was, accordingly, of the view that the
\nCommissioner (Appeals) was not justified in upholding the addition of
\nRs.10 lacs made by the Assessing Officer and disallowing the interest
\npaid by the assessee thereon and accordingly, deleted the same.\n<\/p>\n
7.\t\tThus,
\nboth the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) had
\nmade the addition on the ground that the assessee had not explained
\nthe entry in the account of ‘Darbar’. The Tribunal upon
\nappreciation of the evidence on record has found that the revenue was
\nnot in a position to establish any relation between the assessee and
\nthe Darbar. As is apparent from the facts noted hereinabove, the
\nentry in question was made in the account of ‘Darbar’
\nfound during the course of search. The account did not belong to the
\nassessee, but pertained to a party in respect of whom there is no
\nevidence on record to connect it to the assessee. In the
\ncircumstances, the department could not have thrown the burden on the
\nassessee to explain the said entries. It was for the revenue to
\nestablish its case that the entries regarding receipt of cash in fact
\npertained to the assessee as well as to establish the connection
\nbetween the assessee and ‘Darbar’ to make out a case that
\nthe cash of Rs.7 lacs and Rs.3 lacs had in fact been paid by or on
\nbehalf of the assessee. However, in the absence of any evidence to
\nestablish any connection between the assessee and ‘Darbar’,
\nthe Assessing Officer was not justified in making the addition by
\npresuming that the cash had been deposited by ‘Darbar’ on
\nbehalf of the assessee. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in
\nholding that the Department had not been able to make out any case to
\nshow that the cash of Rs.7 lacs and Rs.3 lacs paid in the account of
\n‘Darbar’ had been paid by or on behalf of the assessee.
\nSince the loan amount of Rs.10 lacs had wrongly been added as
\nundisclosed income of the assessee, consequently the disallowance of
\ninterest thereon was also not justified.\n<\/p>\n
8.\t\tIn
\nthe light of the aforesaid discussion, there being no infirmity in
\nthe impugned order of the Tribunal, the same does not give rise to
\nany question of law, much less, a substantial question of law, so as
\nto warrant interference.\n<\/p>\n
9.\t\tThe
\nappeal is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
[HARSHA
\nDEVANI, J.]<\/p>\n
[H.B.ANTANI,
\nJ.]<\/p>\n
parmar*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 Author: Harsha Devani, H.B.Antani, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAP\/966\/2009 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 966 of 2009 ========================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI – Appellant(s) Versus INTERNATIONAL STEEL CORPORATION – Opponent(s) ========================================= Appearance : […]<\/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-223257","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\" \/>\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=\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-17T17:24:50+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=\"7 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-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-17T17:24:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\"},\"wordCount\":1350,\"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-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\",\"name\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-17T17:24:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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 Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-17T17:24:50+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-17T17:24:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4"},"wordCount":1350,"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-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4","name":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-17T17:24:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-2-august-2011-4#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 2 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/223257","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=223257"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223257\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223257"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223257"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223257"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}