{"id":24854,"date":"2011-04-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2"},"modified":"2019-03-14T05:47:22","modified_gmt":"2019-03-14T00:17:22","slug":"commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;Ms Gokani,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\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\/1379\/2009\t 5\/ 5\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. 1379 of 2009\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nTAX\nAPPEAL No. 1380 of 2009\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nCOMMISSIONER\nOF INCOME TAX - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nDIPAK\nKANTILAL TAKWANI - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMRS\nMAUNA M BHATT for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMRS SWATI SOPARKAR for Opponent(s) :\n1, \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\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\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\tMS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 18\/04\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nRevenue in this appeal against the common judgment of the Income Tax<br \/>\nAppellate Tribunal (&#8216;the Tribunal&#8217; for short)\t dated 30\/01\/2009,<br \/>\nraising following questions for our consideration.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;[A]\tWhether<br \/>\non the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate<br \/>\nTribunal erred in confirming the order of the CIT (A), in deleting<br \/>\nthe penalty levied u\/s. 271D, on the grounds that the same has been<br \/>\nbarred by limitation in view of section 275 (1) (a)?\n<\/p>\n<p>[B]\tWhether<br \/>\non the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate<br \/>\nTribunal erred in not observing that various transactions which have<br \/>\nbeen subject matter of penalty proceedings are also dealt with in the<br \/>\nassessment order.  In fact the original of which are not books of<br \/>\naccounts of the assessee, as such, section 275 (1) (c) is applicable<br \/>\nin this case and not section 275 (1) (a)?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tFrom<br \/>\nthe above portion it can be seen that issue pertains to imposition of<br \/>\npenalty against the assessee under Section 271 D of the Income Tax<br \/>\nAct and whether the same in facts of the case was barred by<br \/>\nlimitation in view of the provisions contained in Section 275 (1) (c)<br \/>\nof the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tPreviously<br \/>\nfinding that the Tribunal had not given reasons for rejecting of the<br \/>\nappeal of the revenue, in our order dated 28\/02\/2011 we had issued<br \/>\nNotice for final disposal recording the contention of the Counsel for<br \/>\nthe revenue that no reasons are recorded by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tWe<br \/>\nhave thus heard learned Counsels appearing for the parties for final<br \/>\ndisposal of the appeal. From the record we find that the question of<br \/>\npenalty imposed by the Assessing Officer was carried further in<br \/>\nappeal by the assessee.  CIT (A) has deleted the penalty by detailed<br \/>\norder primarily holding that the proceedings were barred by<br \/>\nlimitation. It was this issue which the Revenue carried in further<br \/>\nappeal before the Tribunal.  Tribunal by the common order dismissed<br \/>\nthe appeals.  After recording the background and a portion of CIT<br \/>\n(A)&#8217;s order, the Tribunal&#8217;s own conclusions were recorded in<br \/>\nparagraph No.11 of the judgment which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;11.\tWe<br \/>\nhave considered the submissions of the DR and perused the contents of<br \/>\nthe written submissions, we find that the CIT (A) while deleting the<br \/>\npenalty levied by the CIT has quoted various decisions of the High<br \/>\nCourts and Tribunals.  Therefore, we need not to go into the merits<br \/>\nof the case and accordingly we are not inclined to interfere with the<br \/>\norder of the CIT (A).  We confirm the same.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tFrom<br \/>\nthe above portion we find that the Tribunal gave no reasons<br \/>\nwhatsoever for rejecting the appeals.  All that the Tribunal stated<br \/>\nwas that the CIT (A) has quoted various decisions of the High Courts<br \/>\nand Tribunals. The Tribunal therefore was of the opinion that it need<br \/>\nnot go into merits of the case and was not inclined to interfere with<br \/>\nthe order of the CIT (A).\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIn<br \/>\nfew cases we have noticed that the Tribunal without giving any<br \/>\nreasons at all has either rejected or allowed the appeals, be of the<br \/>\nassessee or the revenue. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal<br \/>\ndischarging important judicial functions, is required to give reasons<br \/>\nhowsoever brief for the  ultimate conclusion, it has reached while<br \/>\neither accepting or rejecting the appeal. It is by now well settled<br \/>\nthat the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority. Income Tax<br \/>\nTribunal also is a specialized Tribunal dealing permanently in Income<br \/>\nTax matters.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAs<br \/>\na final fact finding authority, Tribunal&#8217;s factual conclusions hold<br \/>\nimmense importance in Tax Appeal carried before us. Being a<br \/>\nspecialized Tribunal, it&#8217;s appreciation on legal questions also holds<br \/>\nconsiderable importance to us. When a Tribunal&#8217;s judgment is bereft<br \/>\nof any discussion either on facts or in law, it besides being an<br \/>\nunreasoned order of a quasi judicial tribunal, also increases our<br \/>\nburden together facts from other record and to verify whether the<br \/>\nultimate conclusion that the Tribunal arrived at, calls for any<br \/>\ninterference or not. In absence of any discussion on facts or on law<br \/>\nby the Tribunal, we are left to imagine what must have weighed with<br \/>\nthe Tribunal to arrive at a particular conclusion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tRequirement<br \/>\nof recording reasons by all authorities discharging judicial or quasi<br \/>\njudicial functions has been considered by the Apex Court in time<br \/>\nwithout numbers. In recent decision in case of Kranti Associates<br \/>\nPrivate Limited &amp; Anr. Vs. Masood Ahmed Khan and Ors., reported<br \/>\nin (2010) 9 SCC 496, the Apex Court referring to large number of<br \/>\njudgments on the point summarized the position as thus.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;47.\tSummarizing<br \/>\nthe above discussion, this Court holds:\n<\/p>\n<p>a. In India the judicial trend<br \/>\nhas always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions,<br \/>\nif such decisions affect anyone prejudicially.\n<\/p>\n<p>b. A quasi-judicial authority<br \/>\nmust record reasons in support of its conclusions.\n<\/p>\n<p>c. Insistence on recording of<br \/>\nreasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice<br \/>\nmust not only be done it must also appear to be done as well.\n<\/p>\n<p>d. Recording of reasons also<br \/>\noperates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of<br \/>\njudicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative power.\n<\/p>\n<p>e. Reasons reassure that<br \/>\ndiscretion has been exercised by the decision maker on  relevant<br \/>\ngrounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations.\n<\/p>\n<p>f. Reasons have virtually<br \/>\nbecome as indispensable a component of a decision making process as<br \/>\nobserving principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial<br \/>\nand even by administrative bodies.\n<\/p>\n<p>g. Reasons facilitate the<br \/>\nprocess of judicial review by superior Courts.\n<\/p>\n<p>h. The ongoing judicial trend<br \/>\nin all countries committed to rule of law and constitutional<br \/>\ngovernance is in favour of reasoned decisions based on relevant<br \/>\nfacts. This is virtually the life blood of judicial decision making<br \/>\njustifying the principle that reason is the soul of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>i. Judicial or even<br \/>\nquasi-judicial opinions these days can be as different as the judges<br \/>\nand authorities who deliver them. All these decisions serve one<br \/>\ncommon purpose which is to demonstrate by reason that the relevant<br \/>\nfactors have been objectively considered. This is important for<br \/>\nsustaining the litigants&#8217; faith in the justice delivery system.\n<\/p>\n<p>j. Insistence on reason is a<br \/>\nrequirement for both judicial accountability and transparency.\n<\/p>\n<p>k. If a Judge or a<br \/>\nquasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his\/her decision<br \/>\nmaking process then it is impossible to know whether the person<br \/>\ndeciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of<br \/>\nincrementalism.\n<\/p>\n<p>l. Reasons in support of<br \/>\ndecisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons<br \/>\nor &#8216;rubber-stamp reasons&#8217; is not to be equated with a<br \/>\nvalid decision making process.\n<\/p>\n<p>m. It cannot be doubted that<br \/>\ntransparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial<br \/>\npowers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and<br \/>\ndecision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to<br \/>\nbroader scrutiny.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(See<br \/>\nDavid Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor (1987) 100 \tHarward Law<br \/>\nReview 731-737).\n<\/p>\n<p>n. Since the requirement to<br \/>\nrecord reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in<br \/>\ndecision making, the said requirement is now virtually a component of<br \/>\nhuman rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See<br \/>\n(1994) 19 EHRR 553, at 562 para 29 and Anya vs. University of Oxford,<br \/>\n2001 EWCA Civ 405, wherein the Court referred to Article 6 of<br \/>\nEuropean Convention of Human Rights which requires, &#8220;adequate<br \/>\nand intelligent reasons must be given for judicial decisions&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>o. In all common law<br \/>\njurisdictions judgments play a vital role in setting up precedents<br \/>\nfor the future. Therefore, for development of law, requirement of<br \/>\ngiving reasons for the decision is of the essence and is virtually a<br \/>\npart of &#8220;Due Process&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tUnder<br \/>\nthe circumstances, the impugned order is set aside.  Proceedings are<br \/>\nremanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and disposal in<br \/>\naccordance with law after giving its reasons.  We have not expressed<br \/>\nany opinion on merits of the issue decided by the CIT (A).\n<\/p>\n<p>(AKIL<br \/>\nKURESHI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>(SONIA<br \/>\nGOKANI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>sompura<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;Ms Gokani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAP\/1379\/2009 5\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 1379 of 2009 To TAX APPEAL No. 1380 of 2009 ========================================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX &#8211; Appellant(s) Versus DIPAK [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24854","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\" \/>\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 18 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\" \/>\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=\"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-14T00:17:22+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-18-april-2011-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-14T00:17:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\"},\"wordCount\":1341,\"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-18-april-2011-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\",\"name\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-14T00:17:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 - 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\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-14T00:17:22+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-18-april-2011-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011","datePublished":"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-14T00:17:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2"},"wordCount":1341,"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-18-april-2011-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2","name":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-14T00:17:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-vs-unknown-on-18-april-2011-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner vs Unknown on 18 April, 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:\/\/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\/24854","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=24854"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24854\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24854"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24854"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24854"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}