{"id":230092,"date":"2010-04-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010"},"modified":"2017-12-27T01:23:40","modified_gmt":"2017-12-26T19:53:40","slug":"commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: ………………….J.<\/div>\n
Bench: S.H. Kapadia, Swatanter Kumar<\/div>\n
                                IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n                 CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8914-8922 OF 2003\n\n\nCommissioner of Income Tax, Indore                     ...Appellant(s)\n\n\n                                    Versus\n\n\nPawan Kumar Laddha                                    ...Respondent(s)\n\n\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
S.H. KAPADIA,J.\n<\/p>\n
        At the hearing of the appeal filed by the assessee
\nbefore the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order
\nunder Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Revenue
\nraised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of
\nthe appeal on the ground that the assessee having not paid
\nthe   admitted    tax    before     filing   the   appeal,   the     appeal
\npreferred by him should be dismissed as not maintainable.               In
\nthis connection, reliance was placed by the Department in
\nsupport of it’s preliminary objection on Section 249(4)(a) of
\nthe   Income   Tax    Act,   1961   [`1961   Act’,   for   short].     The
\nRevenue invited the attention of the Income Tax Appellate
\nTribunal [`Appellate Tribunal’, for short] to letter dated
\n19th October, 2001, wherein it was stated that the assessee
\nhad paid a sum of       Rs.22,63,600\/- before filing of the appeal
\n                                                                     …2\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                        – 2 –\n<\/p>\n
out of Rs.26,47,800\/- payable by the assessee in terms of his
\nBlock Returns.          Before the Appellate Tribunal, the assessee
\nobjected to the above contention of the Department on the
\nground that Section 249(4) of 1961 Act cannot be read into
\nSection     253(1)(b)         which     deals     with       the     Appeals      to     the
\nAppellate       Tribunal       and      which     falls        in     Chapter      XX(B).
\nAccording    to      the    assessee,       Section        249,     which   deals       with
\nAppeals    to     the      Commissioner       (Appeals),           falls    in    Chapter
\nXX(A),    whereas       Appeals       to    the       Appellate       Tribunal         under
\nSection 253(1)(b) falls in Chapter XX(B).\n<\/p>\n
          After      going        through       the        provisions       of    Section
\n249(4)(a) and Section 253(1)(b) of 1961 Act, which, at the
\nrelevant time, dealt with an order passed by the Assessing
\nOfficer under Section 158BC(c) of 1961 Act, the Appellate
\nTribunal held that one cannot read Section 249(4)(a) into the
\nprovisions      of    Section      253(1)(b)          of    1961    Act;    that       while
\nSection 253(1)          was   an     enabling     provision          giving      right    of
\nappeal to the assessee to file an appeal to the Appellate
\nTribunal,       there       was    no      provision         similar        to    Section
\n249(4)(a), which fell in Chapter XX(A) in Section 253(1)(b),
\nhence, it was not a condition mandatory to the filing of the
\nappeal to the Appellate Tribunal to pay undisputed tax amount
\nas   condition       precedent.            Consequently,           according      to     the
\nAppellate Tribunal, there was no merit in the contention of
\nthe Department that an assessee must pay the admitted tax due
\nbefore or at the time of filing of the appeal before the
\nAppellate Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
          Aggrieved by the decision of the Appellate Tribunal
\non the preliminary objection raised by the Department, the
\nmatter was      carried in appeal            under Section 260A of 1961 Act
\n                                                                                   …3\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 3 –\n<\/p>\n
by the Department to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore
\nBench, which has affirmed the view of the Appellate Tribunal.
\nHence, these civil appeals.\n<\/p>\n
          At the outset, we may state that, in these civil
\nappeals, we are concerned with Block Period 1986-1987 to 14th
\nSeptember, 1995.         This aspect is important because the law
\nhas since undergone several changes, particularly after 1st
\nOctober,    1998,   in    the    matter     of   grant      of   stay    by    the
\nAppellate Tribunal under Section 253(7) of 1961 Act, which
\nsub-section did not exist during the relevant period.                      Hence,
\nthis judgement is confined to the period prior to 1st October,
\n1998.\n<\/p>\n
          None appears for the assessee, though served.
\n          The   basic    argument    advanced     by     Shri      V.   Shekhar,
\nlearned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Department,
\nbefore us, was that Section 249(4), inter alia, states that
\nno appeal under this Chapter [i.e., Chapter XX] shall be
\nadmitted unless at the time of filing of the appeal, the
\nassessee has paid the admitted tax due on the income returned
\nby him.     According to the learned counsel, the present case
\nis covered by Section 249(4)(a) of 1961 Act inasmuch as the
\nassessee, in the present case, did file his Block Return in
\nwhich he declared his undisclosed income of Rs.26,47,800\/-.
\nThe     assessee,   as     stated      above,      however,         paid      only
\nRs.22,63,600\/- and       not the     full amount       of    Rs.26,47,800\/-,
\nhence, according to the Department, the appeal preferred by
\nthe   assessee   was     not    maintainable.       In      this   connection,
\nlearned counsel submitted that Chapter XX of 1961 Act dealt
\nwith Appeals and Revision.           That Chapter had different Heads
\nat the relevant     time in the form         of Appeals to Commissioner
\n                                                                           …4\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                    – 4 –\n<\/p>\n
(Appeals) [Heading `A’], Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal
\n[Heading `B’], Reference to High Court [Heading `C’], Appeals
\nto   the    Supreme   Court      [Heading      `D’]   and   Revision    by   the
\nCommissioner [Heading `E’] etc.                 According to the learned
\ncounsel, in Section 249(4), the words used are “no appeal
\nunder `this Chapter’ shall be admitted unless at the time of
\nfiling of the appeal, the assessee has paid the tax due on
\nthe income returned by him”.             The learned counsel emphasised
\nthe words “this Chapter” in Section 249(4) to mean the whole
\nof Chapter XX and not Chapter XX(A) alone and, consequently,
\nevery appellant at the time of filing of appeal under Section
\n253(1) to the Appellate Tribunal was required to pay the
\nadmitted tax due on the income returned by him in terms of
\nSection 249(4)(a) of 1961 Act as condition precedent failing
\nwhich      his   appeal    was    not    maintainable.            Consequently,
\naccording to the learned counsel, in the present case, since
\nthe assessee had failed to pay the tax due on the income
\nreturned by him, his appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under
\nSection      253(1)(b)     should       have    been    dismissed      as    not
\nmaintainable.\n<\/p>\n
           We find no merit in the above arguments.                     At the
\noutset, we may reiterate that, in these civil appeals, we are
\nconcerned with the period prior to 1st October, 1998.                        This
\njudgment is confined strictly to the Block Period 1986-1987
\nto 14th September, 1995.\n<\/p>\n
           Chapter    XX    deals     with     “Appeals     and    Revisions”.
\nChapter XX is divided into Headings `A’ to `F’.                    Section 246
\nenumerates a list of Orders of the Assessing Officer against
\nwhich appeal(s) would lie.            In that list of Orders, an appeal
\nto   the    Appellate      Tribunal     under    Section     253(1)    is    not
\n                                                                         …5\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                      – 5 –\n<\/p>\n
mentioned.       This is a very important indicia to show that
\neach Heading in Chapter XX deals with a different subject-
\nmatter and one cannot read the words in Chapter XX(A) into
\nthe words used in Chapter XX(B).                  Chapter XX(A) deals with
\nAppeals to the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals)
\nwhereas Chapter XX(B) deals with Appeals to the Appellate
\nTribunal.     Similarly, Reference to the High Court lies under
\nChapter XX(C).       It is for this reason that we have come to
\nthe conclusion that each Heading is a stand-alone item and,
\ntherefore, one cannot read the provision of Section 249(4)(a)
\ninto Section 253(1)(b) of 1961 Act.                    If the argument of the
\nDepartment is to be accepted, then, in that event, no appeal
\nor    Reference     could      lie   even    to     the    High     Court      without
\ncomplying with the provisions of Section 249(4)(a) of 1961
\nAct.     This cannot be the Scheme of Chapter XX of 1961 Act.
\nThere is one more reason why we are of the view that Section
\n249(4)(a) cannot be read into Section 253(1)(b) of 1961 Act.
\nSection 253(1)(b) refers to an assessee filing an appeal to
\nthe     Appellate    Tribunal        against      an      order     passed      by     an
\nAssessing Officer under Section 158BC(c) of 1961 Act.                                Sub-
\nsection (b) came to be inserted into Section 253(1) by the
\nFinance Act, 1995, and, that too, with effect from 1st July,
\n1995.      The    very   concept      of    Block      Assessment       came    to    be
\ninserted in the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide Finance Act, 1995,
\nwith effect       from   1st    July,   1995,     whereas         the   words    “this
\nChapter” in Section 249(4) came to be inserted in the Income
\nTax Act, 1961, vide Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975, with
\neffect from 1st October, 1975.                This is one more reason to
\nconfine the       expression “this Chapter” in               Section      249(4) to
\n                                                                                …6\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                           – 6 –\n<\/p>\n
Chapter XX(A) without it being extended to Section 253(1)(b)
\nwhich is there in Chapter XX(B).                          Further, under the Scheme
\nof   Chapter      XX,    as   stated          above,      no    appeal       under       Section
\n249(4)(a)      in    Chapter            XX(A)       was      admissible           without      the
\nassessee    having       paid      the     admitted          tax     due     on    the    income
\nreturned by him.           It appears that once Section 249(4)(a) is
\ntreated as a mandatory condition for filing an appeal before
\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and once that condition
\nstood    satisfied       at       the    time      of     his   filing        an    appeal     to
\nCommissioner        of   Income         Tax     (Appeals),           then,    there      was    no
\nnecessity for the assessee to once again pay the admitted tax
\ndue as a condition precedent to his filing the appeal before
\nthe Appellate Tribunal under Section 253(1)(b) of 1961 Act.
\nLastly, one must keep in mind the principle that the doctrine
\nof   incorporation         cannot         be       invoked      by     implication.              A
\nprovision      which       insists            on    the      assessee         satisfying         a
\ncondition of paying the admitted tax as condition precedent
\nto his filing of appeal under Section 253(1)(b) of 1961 Act
\nis a dis-enabling provision.                       Such a dis-enabling provision
\nmust be clearly spelt out by the Legislature while enacting
\nthe statute.        The Courts have to be careful in reading into
\nthe Act such dis-enabling provisions as that would tantamount
\nto judicial legislation which the Courts must eschew.                                       It is
\nfor the Parliament to specifically say that no appeal shall
\nbe filed or admitted or maintainable without the assessee(s)
\npaying the admitted tax due.                       That has been done only in the
\ncase of an appeal under Section 249(4)(a) of 1961 Act.                                          We
\ncannot     read     such      a     dis-enabling             provision        into       Section
\n253(1)(b)    of     1961      Act.        If       we   do     so,    we     are    judicially
\nlegislating
\n                                                                                          …7\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                          – 7 –\n<\/p>\n
by reading something into the Act which is not there.                                   In
\nsuch a case, the question would also arise as to why the
\nAppellate Tribunal should not be given the power to dispense
\nwith or waive such a condition?                    All this would come in the
\nrealm     of     legislation          which      can     be     done     only      by   the
\nLegislature.          Hence, we find no merit in these civil appeals
\nfiled by the Department.\n<\/p>\n
          We are informed by the learned counsel appearing on
\nbehalf     of        the     Department     that,       since     the       question     of
\npreliminary objection raised by the Department was pending
\ndetermination in this Court, the Appellate Tribunal, Indore
\nBench, has, till date, not disposed of the appeal, bearing
\nNo.IT(SS) No.13\/IND\/1996, preferred by the assessee before
\nit.      If that is so, we direct the Appellate Tribunal to
\ndispose        of      the      assessee’s        appeal,        bearing        No.IT(SS)
\nNo.13\/IND\/1996,            as   expeditiously          as     possible,       on   merits,
\nwithin a period of three months from today.                              The period of
\nthree     months       shall     be    counted         from    the     date     when    the
\nAppellate       Tribunal        receives      this      order.         We     direct    the
\nRegistry        to     immediately        send     the        original      record      and
\nproceedings to the Appellate Tribunal.                        We express no opinion
\non the merits of the case.\n<\/p>\n
          Accordingly,           these     civil        appeals        filed       by   the
\nDepartment are dismissed with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                                        ………………….J.\n<\/p>\n
                                                        [S.H. KAPADIA]<\/p>\n
                                                        ………………….J.\n<\/p>\n
                                                        [SWATANTER KUMAR]
\nNew Delhi,
\nApril 06, 2010.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 Author: ………………….J. Bench: S.H. Kapadia, Swatanter Kumar IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8914-8922 OF 2003 Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore …Appellant(s) Versus Pawan Kumar Laddha …Respondent(s) J U D G M E […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230092","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCommnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - 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\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-26T19:53:40+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-26T19:53:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1801,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-26T19:53:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 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":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - 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\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-26T19:53:40+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-26T19:53:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010"},"wordCount":1801,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010","name":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-26T19:53:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commnr-of-income-tax-indore-vs-pawan-kumar-laddha-on-6-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commnr. Of Income Tax, Indore vs Pawan Kumar Laddha on 6 April, 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\/230092","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=230092"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230092\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230092"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}