{"id":240209,"date":"2008-08-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008"},"modified":"2015-02-03T07:46:27","modified_gmt":"2015-02-03T02:16:27","slug":"ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007                                             1\n\n              In the High Court of Punjab &amp; Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n                                        Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007.\n                                             Date of decision : 11.8.2008\n\nM\/s. Vashisht Ispat Products                                          ..... Appellant\n                                  vs\nCustoms, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal\nand another\n                                                                  ..... Respondents<\/pre>\n<pre>Coram:          Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta\n                Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal\n\n\nPresent:        Mr. Pawan K. Pahwa, Advocate, for the appellant.\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>                Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate, for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rajesh Bindal J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                The assessee has filed the present appeal under Section 35 G of<br \/>\nthe Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, &#8216;the Act&#8217;) against the order passed<br \/>\nby the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for<br \/>\nshort, &#8220;the Tribunal&#8221;), in Final Order No. 1517\/06-SM (BR) dated<br \/>\n18.10.2006, raising the following substantial questions of law:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                       (i) Whether duty can be demanded for the period<br \/>\n                             September 1997 to March 2002 on the basis of Show<br \/>\n                             Cause     Notice&#8217;s   dated   24.09.98,     03.11.98,       and<br \/>\n                             27.08.2002 when the duty liability was finally<br \/>\n                             determined on 29.03.2004?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                       (ii) Whether the show cause notices dated 24.09.1998 and<br \/>\n                             27.08.2002 respectively are time barred?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                       (iii) Whether interest on demand of duty can be confirmed<br \/>\n                             by Hon&#8217;ble Tribunal for the period prior to the date of<br \/>\n                             determination of the annual capacity?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                       (iv) Whether natural justice has been violated by<br \/>\n                             respondent by ignoring the submissions made by the<br \/>\n                             appellant; wrongly and arbitrarily interpreting the<br \/>\n                             supporting documentary evidence produced by the<br \/>\n                             appellant?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\"> Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                       (v) Whether order of the respondent No.1 is sustainable<br \/>\n                             in law?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                       (vi) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present<br \/>\n                             case, orders passed by Respondents are arbitrary,<br \/>\n                             illegal and perverse and thus liable to be quashed?&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                The assessee in the present case is manufacturer of non alloy<br \/>\nsteel products falling under Chapter-72 of the Schedule to Central Excise<br \/>\nTariff Act, 1985. With effect from 1.9.1997, the products manufactured by<br \/>\nthe appellant were subjected to duty under Compounded Levy Scheme<br \/>\nunder the Act. To give effect to the scheme, Section 3A was added in the<br \/>\nAct and Rule 96 ZP was added in the Central Excise Rules, 1944. As the<br \/>\nbasis for levy of excise duty under the Compound Levy Scheme was<br \/>\ncapacity of production, to determine the capacity of production, Hot Re-<br \/>\nrolling Steel Mills Annual Determination Rules, 1997 (for short, &#8216;the<br \/>\nCapacity Determination Rules&#8217;), were framed for the purpose. Certain<br \/>\nparameters were provided in the Capacity Determination Rules on the basis<br \/>\nof which the capacity was to be determined.\n<\/p>\n<p>                Vide order dated 10.12.1997, annual capacity of production of<br \/>\nthe appellant was determined as 1445 MT. However, in appeal, the Tribunal<br \/>\nvide order dated 24.12.1998, while setting aside the order remanded the<br \/>\ncase back to the Commissioner for fresh decision. Prior thereto on the basis<br \/>\nof capacity already determined vide order dated                   10.12.1997, the<br \/>\nrespondents had issued show cause notice to the appellant for payment of<br \/>\nduty. After remand by the Tribunal, the annual capacity of production was<br \/>\ndetermined by the Commissioner vide order dated 9.2.2000. The above<br \/>\norder was again set aside by the Tribunal vide order dated 4.9.2000 and the<br \/>\ncase was remanded back. Finally it was on 29.3.2004 that the annual<br \/>\ncapacity of production of the assessee was determined as 1445 MT from<br \/>\n1.9.1997 to 1.8.1999, and 970.392 MT for the period from 2.8.1999 to<br \/>\n31.3.2000 and it was on the basis thereof that the duty was demanded from<br \/>\nthe appellant, which according to the appellant, has already been paid and<br \/>\nthe dispute in the present case remains only for the payment of interest on<br \/>\naccount of delay in payment thereof.\n<\/p>\n<p>                Learned counsel for the asssessee submitted that as the final<br \/>\norder determining the capacity of production of the assessee came to be<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>passed on 29.3.2004, the assessee could be asked to pay the interest, if any,<br \/>\nonly from that date and not from any date prior thereto. However, we find<br \/>\nthe contention of the learned counsel to be totally misconceived. The annual<br \/>\ncapacity production of the assessee was for the first time determined on<br \/>\n10.12.1997 and thereafter at the behest of the assessee the same remained<br \/>\nunder litigation and finally the capacity was determined the same as was<br \/>\noriginally determined vide order dated 10.12.1997. It was only w.e.f.<br \/>\n2.8.1999 that the lesser capacity of production was determined and the<br \/>\nreason therefor was that in the subsequent period there was change in the<br \/>\nmachinery installed in the unit of the assessee. Applying the change in<br \/>\nparameters for the assessment of the capacity, the annual capacity of<br \/>\nproduction of the assessee was reduced. Merely because the assessee was<br \/>\nlitigating for determination of his annual capacity, he cannot be permitted to<br \/>\nraise that interest should not be charged from him on account of delay in<br \/>\ndeposit of excise duty from the date when the duty was required to be paid,<br \/>\nespecially when the capacity of production was the same as was originally<br \/>\nfixed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                For the reasons mentioned above, we do not find any<br \/>\nsubstantial question of law arises in the present appeal. The same is,<br \/>\naccordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\n                                                     ( Rajesh Bindal)\n                                                           Judge\n\n\n11.8.2008                                            (Hemant Gupta)\nvs.                                                      Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007 1 In the High Court of Punjab &amp; Haryana at Chandigarh Central Excise Appeal No. 83 of 2007. Date of decision : 11.8.2008 M\/s. Vashisht Ispat Products &#8230;.. Appellant vs Customs, Excise and Service Tax [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-240209","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - 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\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"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\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":777,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - 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\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008"},"wordCount":777,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008","name":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-03T02:16:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vashisht-ispat-products-vs-customs-on-11-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Vashisht Ispat Products vs Customs on 11 August, 2008"}]},{"@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\/240209","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=240209"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240209\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=240209"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=240209"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=240209"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}