{"id":248563,"date":"2009-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-01-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-06T05:02:59","modified_gmt":"2017-12-05T23:32:59","slug":"commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009<\/div>\n
ITA No.638 of 2007                    1\n\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.\n\n                                           ITA No.638 of 2007\n                                           Date of decision: 16.1.2009\n\nCommissioner of Income Tax-1,Ludhiana\n                                                   ....Appellant\n                          vs.\nSanjeev Kumar Jain\n                                                   . ..Respondent\n\nCORAM:       HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR.\n             HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH.\n                               ---\nPresent:     Mr.Rajesh Sethi, Advocate, for the appellant.\n\n             Mr.Sandeep Goel, Advocate, for the respondent-assessee.\n                        --\n\nJ.S.KHEHAR,J. (Oral)\n<\/pre>\n
             The respondent-assessee filed his income tax return for the<\/p>\n
assessment year 1996-97 on 30.4.2003.            The Assessing Officer on<\/p>\n
examining the same passed an order under sections 143<\/a>\/147<\/a> of the Income<\/p>\n
Tax Act, 1961 on 31.3.2004, wherein while completing the assessment, he<\/p>\n
made three additions to the declared income of the respondent-assessee,<\/p>\n
namely, a sum of Rs.2,12,750\/- allegedly earned by the assessee as a<\/p>\n
consequence of purchase\/sale of shares, a sum of Rs.1,03,317\/- alleged to be<\/p>\n
unexplained credits found in the bank account of the respondent-assessee,<\/p>\n
as also a sum of Rs.30,000\/- allegedly paid by the respondent-assessee for<\/p>\n
the purchase of a plot.\n<\/p>\n
             It is not a matter of dispute that while arriving at the aforesaid<\/p>\n
conclusions the Assessing Officer recorded at the back of the respondent-<\/p>\n
assessee, statements of Shri H.S.Maheshwari, Shri Parveen Mittal, Shri<\/p>\n
Sanjay Hasija and Shri Rajinder Gulati. It is also not a matter of dispute,<\/p>\n
that before the aforesaid statements could be taken into consideration, it was
\n ITA No.638 of 2007                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
imperative for the Assessing Officer to confront the respondent-assessee<\/p>\n
with the aforesaid statements. It is also not a matter of dispute that the<\/p>\n
aforesaid statements were actually brought to the notice of the respondent-<\/p>\n
assessee<\/p>\n
             The grievance raised by the respondent-assessee while<\/p>\n
repudiating the determination rendered by the Assessing Officer, under<\/p>\n
sections 143<\/a>\/147<\/a> of the Income         Tax Act, 1961, has been that the<\/p>\n
respondent-assessee had made repeated oral requests to the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer, seeking liberty to cross-examine the persons whose statements were<\/p>\n
recorded by the Assessing Officer at his back. In fact, it is the case of the<\/p>\n
respondent-assessee, that a written request was also made by the<\/p>\n
respondent-assessee for the same purpose. Despite thereof, liberty was not<\/p>\n
granted to the assessee to cross-examine either of the four persons whose<\/p>\n
statements formed the basis of the determination of the Assessing Officer.<\/p>\n
             Dissatisfied with the determination rendered by the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer,   the   respondent-assessee   preferred   an   appeal   before   the<\/p>\n
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The aforestated appeal preferred<\/p>\n
by the respondent-assessee, was accepted by the Commissioner of Income<\/p>\n
(Appeals) by an order dated 15.9.2004. The aforesaid Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
arrived at the conclusion, that it was imperative for the Assessing Officer<\/p>\n
to allow the respondent-assessee to cross-examine all the persons whose<\/p>\n
statements were recorded at his back, specially because they had formed the<\/p>\n
basis of arriving at the conclusion that additional income earned by the<\/p>\n
respondent-assessee, had not been depicted in the return filed by him.<\/p>\n
             Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner of<\/p>\n
Income Tax(Appeals) dated 15.9.2004, the Revenue preferred an appeal
\n ITA No.638 of 2007                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. For the same reasons, as had<\/p>\n
been depicted in the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax<\/p>\n
(Appeals) dated 15.9.2004, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, also passed<\/p>\n
an order dated 7.12.2005. Consequent upon the dismissal of the appeal<\/p>\n
preferred by the Revenue at the hands of the Income Tax Appellate<\/p>\n
Tribunal, vide order dated 7.12.2005, the Revenue has approached this<\/p>\n
Court.\n<\/p>\n
             Through the instant appeal, the Revenue has impugned the<\/p>\n
order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated<\/p>\n
15.9.2004, as well as, order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal<\/p>\n
dated 7.12.2005.\n<\/p>\n
             During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the Revenue<\/p>\n
very fairly acknowledged, that the determination rendered by the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer was based on the statements of Shri H.S.Maheshwari. Shri Parveen<\/p>\n
Mittal, Shri Sanjay Hasija and Shri Rajinger Gulati. Learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant also acknowledged, that neither of those individuals was permitted<\/p>\n
to be cross-examined before the determination at the hands of the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer on 31.3.2004, whereby, the Assessing Officer had passed his<\/p>\n
assessment order under sections 143<\/a>\/147<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus<\/p>\n
viewed, we have no hesitation whatsoever to uphold the determination<\/p>\n
rendered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 15.9.2004, as<\/p>\n
well as the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated<\/p>\n
7.12.2005.\n<\/p>\n
             Despite our aforesaid conclusion, it is the vehement contention<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel for the appellant, that even if some procedural defect<\/p>\n
had been found by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), as also by
\n ITA No.638 of 2007                     4<\/span><\/p>\n
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, rather than negating the entire action<\/p>\n
taken by the Revenue, the Appellate Authorities should have annulled the<\/p>\n
procedural defect, and remanded the matter for re-determination from the<\/p>\n
stage when the defect made the subsequent determination unacceptable in<\/p>\n
law.\n<\/p>\n
              We find merit in the aforesaid submission of the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the appellant. The Assessing Officer had failed to afford an<\/p>\n
opportunity to the respondent-assessee to cross-examine the persons whose<\/p>\n
statements were recorded by him, before passing the assessment            order<\/p>\n
under sections 143<\/a>\/147<\/a> of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 31.3.2004. The<\/p>\n
action of the Assessing Officer was unacceptable in law. Naturally, there<\/p>\n
was nothing wrong upto the stage of recording the statements of the 4<\/p>\n
persons referred to above. The proceedings conducted by the Assessing<\/p>\n
Officer after recording the statements of the aforesaid individuals,        are<\/p>\n
liable to be set aside. The same alone are therefore, set aside. It will be open<\/p>\n
to the Assessing Officer to re-initiate the proceedings from the aforesaid<\/p>\n
stage if he is still of the same opinion. In the aforesaid eventuality, any<\/p>\n
further action taken by the Assessing Officer would inevitably require him<\/p>\n
to allow the respondent-assessee to cross-examine all the four witnesses<\/p>\n
whose statements were the basis of the earlier consideration. Thereafter, it<\/p>\n
will be open to the Assessing Officer, to pass a fresh order in accordance<\/p>\n
with law. We would also like to clarify, that the instant liberty granted to the<\/p>\n
Assessing Officer, to re-determine the issue would not enable him to collect<\/p>\n
any further information, besides the material already available with him<\/p>\n
(while passing the order dated 31.3.2004), for the purpose under reference.<\/p>\n
             In the totality of the circumstances, the instant appeal is
\n ITA No.638 of 2007                     5<\/span><\/p>\n
disposed of, with liberty to the Assessing Officer to re-initiate the<\/p>\n
proceedings, as ordered hereinabove.\n<\/p>\n
                                             ( J.S.Khehar)
\n                                                   Judge<\/p>\n
                                             (Nawab Singh )
\n                                                 Judge
\nJanuary 16, 2009
\nrk\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 ITA No.638 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. ITA No.638 of 2007 Date of decision: 16.1.2009 Commissioner of Income Tax-1,Ludhiana ….Appellant vs. Sanjeev Kumar Jain . ..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH. […]<\/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-248563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - 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-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1010,\"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\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009\"}]},{\"@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 Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - 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-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009","datePublished":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009"},"wordCount":1010,"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\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009","name":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-05T23:32:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-1-vs-sanjeev-kumar-jain-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain on 16 January, 2009"}]},{"@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\/248563","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=248563"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/248563\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=248563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=248563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=248563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}