{"id":253542,"date":"2006-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-12-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006"},"modified":"2016-03-07T12:28:48","modified_gmt":"2016-03-07T06:58:48","slug":"dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","title":{"rendered":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M Katju<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S. B. Sinha, Markandey Katju<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5635 of 2006\n\nPETITIONER:\nDr. T. A. Quereshi\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCommissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/12\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nS. B. Sinha &amp; Markandey Katju\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">J U D G M E N T<br \/>\n(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6939 of 2005)<\/p>\n<p>MARKANDEY KATJU, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\tThis appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated<br \/>\n29.11.2004 passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in I.T.A. No. 33 of<br \/>\n1999.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\tHeard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\tThe appellant is an assessee.  He is a doctor by profession at a place<br \/>\ncalled &#8216;Garoth&#8217; in District Mandsaur.  On 18.7.1985, CBI sleuths arrested<br \/>\nthe appellant while transporting a huge quantity of contraband <a href=\"\/doc\/237570\/\" id=\"a_1\">article (the<br \/>\nnarcotic drugs heroin)<\/a> in a Jeep (Jonga) RSO 3592.   This led to further raid<br \/>\nin his residential premises.  In this raid, one clandestine laboratory to<br \/>\nmanufacture heroin powder along with several contraband drugs was<br \/>\nrecovered.  All these contraband articles were seized and proceedings under<br \/>\nthe <a href=\"\/doc\/1727139\/\" id=\"a_1\">NDPS Act<\/a> were initiated against the assessee.  We are not concerned<br \/>\nwith these proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\tSo far as proceedings under the <a href=\"\/doc\/789969\/\" id=\"a_2\">Income Tax Act<\/a> are concerned, with<br \/>\nwhich we are concerned, the assessee-appellant filed his return for the<br \/>\nAssessment Year 1986-87.  In this assessment the assessee claimed that<br \/>\nsince the heroin seized from him forms part of his stock in trade hence its<br \/>\nloss on account of seizure is an allowable deduction while computing his<br \/>\nprofits and gains of business\/profession.  The Assessment Officer by order<br \/>\ndated 28.3.1989 did not accept the contention of the assessee and added a<br \/>\nsum of Rs. 5,50,000\/-, being the assessed value of the heroin seized,  as an<br \/>\nincome from undisclosed source.  In appeal filed by assessee the CIT<br \/>\n(Appeal) upheld the order of Assessment Officer by his order dated<br \/>\n1.2.1990.  The assessee then filed a second appeal before the Tribunal.  By<br \/>\nits order dated 31.3.1993 the Tribunal reduced the value of the heroin seized<br \/>\nto Rs.2 lacs, but refused to deduct this amount from the assessee&#8217;s income as<br \/>\na business loss, since according to the Tribunal the assessee had not claimed<br \/>\nit as a business loss.  However, subsequently on an application under <a href=\"\/doc\/120133658\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section<br \/>\n254(2)<\/a> the Tribunal by order dated 26.4.1994 accepted that the assessee had<br \/>\nin fact claimed it as a loss, and consequently it recalled its order dated<br \/>\n31.3.1993.  Ultimately, the Tribunal by order dated 14.10.1998 allowed the<br \/>\nappeal and held that the assessee is entitled to claim the deduction as a<br \/>\nbusiness loss.  In other words, the Tribunal was of the view that since the<br \/>\nseizure has resulted in loss in trade hence, relying upon the law laid down by<br \/>\nthis Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/528298\/\" id=\"a_4\">CIT vs. Piara Singh<\/a> 124 ITR 40, the Tribunal allowed the<br \/>\ndeduction of Rs.2 lacs out of the gross total income of the assessee.  It is<br \/>\nagainst this view of the Tribunal that the revenue felt aggrieved and filed the<br \/>\nappeal before the High Court which, as stated above, was admitted for final<br \/>\nhearing on the following questions of law:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">1.\tWhether possession of heroin in contravention of<br \/>\nprovision of the <a href=\"\/doc\/1727139\/\" id=\"a_5\">NDPS Act<\/a>, 1985 can be treated to be<br \/>\nstock and trade possessed by a Medical Practitioner ?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">2.\tWhether such Medical Practitioner can be permitted to<br \/>\ndeduct Rs. 2 lacs from such stock of heroin as loss during<br \/>\nthe trade ?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">3.\tWhether the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate<br \/>\nTribunal, Indore Bench in IT-272\/89-90 for Assessment<br \/>\nYear 1986-87 is perverse and illegal ?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">By the impugned order the High Court allowed the appeal and set<br \/>\naside the order of the Tribunal.  Hence, this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">In paragraph 7 of its judgment, the High Court has relied on the<br \/>\nexplanation to <a href=\"\/doc\/789969\/\" id=\"a_6\">Section 37<\/a> of the Income Tax Act which states :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">&#8220;S.37  Explanation &#8211;  For the removal of doubts, it is hereby<br \/>\ndeclared that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any<br \/>\npurpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall<br \/>\nnot be deemed to have been incurred for the purpose of<br \/>\nbusiness or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be<br \/>\nmade in respect of such expenditure&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">Learned senior counsel for the appellant Mr. M. L.Verma, contended<br \/>\nthat <a href=\"\/doc\/789969\/\" id=\"a_7\">Section 37<\/a> of the Act has no application in this case since <a href=\"\/doc\/789969\/\" id=\"a_8\">Section 37<\/a><br \/>\nrelates to business expenditure, and in this case we are not concerned with<br \/>\nbusiness expenditure but with business loss.  We agree with this contention.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">No doubt, it was initially contented by the assessee before the Income<br \/>\nTax authorities that the apparatus for manufacturing heroin from opium did<br \/>\nnot belong to the assessee but belonged to one V. T. Madan.  However, the<br \/>\nAssessing Officer did not agree with this contention and the Tribunal in its<br \/>\nearlier order dated 31.3.1993 has recorded a finding (in paragraph 7 of its<br \/>\norder) that the assessee was involved in the manufacture and selling of<br \/>\nheroin for material gain.  Thus, it has been held by the Income Tax<br \/>\nauthorities that the appellant was engaged in manufacture of heroin and<br \/>\nselling it for material gain.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">No doubt, the assessee had contended that he was only earning<br \/>\nincome from his medical profession and was not doing any illegal activity of<br \/>\nmanufacturing and selling of heroin.  However, the finding of fact of the<br \/>\nTribunal in its order dated 31.3.1993 is that the assessee was engaged in<br \/>\nmanufacture and selling of heroin.  Thus the Income Tax authorities<br \/>\nthemselves have recorded a finding that the assessee was engaged in<br \/>\nmanufacture and selling of heroin.  No doubt the order of the Tribunal dated<br \/>\n31.3.1993 was subsequently recalled by the Tribunal, but since with ultimate<br \/>\norder dated 14.10.1998 the Tribunal has held that the heroin seized was the<br \/>\nassessee&#8217;s stock in trade it is implicit that the Tribunal reiterated to view that<br \/>\nthe assessee was doing the business of manufacture and sale of heroin.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">Once the Income Tax authorities records such a finding of fact, it<br \/>\nfollows that any loss from such a business is a business loss.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">The facts of this case are squarely covered by the decision of this<br \/>\nCourt in <a href=\"\/doc\/528298\/\" id=\"a_9\">CIT vs. Piara Singh<\/a>  AIR 1980 SC 1271 which was a case of an<br \/>\nassessee carrying on smuggling activity and this Court held that the loss<br \/>\narising out of confiscation of currency notes must be allowed as a business<br \/>\nloss.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">In the order of the Tribunal dated 14.10.1998 there is a finding of fact<br \/>\nin paragraph 8 to the effect that the heroin forms part of the stock in trade of<br \/>\nthe assessee.  In view of this finding, the Tribunal allowed the assessee&#8217;s<br \/>\nclaim of deducting the loss of 5 kg. of heroin whose value was assessed by<br \/>\nthe Tribunal at Rs. 2 lacs as a business loss.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">We fully agree with the view taken by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">The High Court, however, in paragraph 10 of its judgment observed:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">&#8220;The assessee in this case was engaged in profession of doctor.<br \/>\nHe had nothing to do with the contraband article  Heroin for<br \/>\ncarrying on his profession.  It is an admitted fact that possession<br \/>\nof Heroin is an offence under <a href=\"\/doc\/1727139\/\" id=\"a_10\">NDPS Act<\/a>.  In this view, the<br \/>\nrigour of explanation to <a href=\"\/doc\/496325\/\" id=\"a_11\">Section 37<\/a> was fully satisfied and<br \/>\nhence the question claiming any deduction for the value of<br \/>\nseized article did not arise nor was an assessee entitled to claim<br \/>\nany such deduction who was bound in indulging in such<br \/>\nheinous and illegal business unconnected with his pious<br \/>\nprofessional activity.  Indeed, it was disgrace for a doctor<br \/>\ncommunity where one doctor was found indulging in doing<br \/>\nsuch kind of activities against the humanity&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_21\">\tIn our opinion, the High Court has adopted an emotional and moral<br \/>\napproach rather than a legal approach.  We fully agree with the High Court<br \/>\nthat the assessee was committing a highly immoral act in illegally<br \/>\nmanufacturing and selling heroin.  However, cases are to be decided by<br \/>\nCourt on legal principles and not on one&#8217;s own moral views.  Law is<br \/>\ndifferent from morality, as the positivist jurists Bentham and Austin pointed<br \/>\nout.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_22\">As already observed above, the facts of the case are squarely covered<br \/>\nby the decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/528298\/\" id=\"a_12\">CIT vs. Piara Singh<\/a> (supra).\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_23\">The explanation to <a href=\"\/doc\/496325\/\" id=\"a_13\">Section 37<\/a> has really nothing to do with the<br \/>\npresent case as it is not a case of a business expenditure, but of business loss.<br \/>\nBusiness losses are allowable on ordinary commercial principles in<br \/>\ncomputing profits.  Once it is found that the heroin seized formed part of the<br \/>\nstock in trade of the assessee, it follows that the seizure and confiscation of<br \/>\nsuch stock in trade has to be allowed as a business loss.  Loss of stock in<br \/>\ntrade has to be considered as a trading loss vide <a href=\"\/doc\/1475921\/\" id=\"a_14\">Commissioner of Income-<br \/>\nTax vs. S.N.A.S.A. Annamalai Chettiar<\/a> AIR 1973 SC 1032.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_24\">For the reasons given above, the impugned judgment of the High<br \/>\nCourt cannot be sustained and it is hereby set aside and the order of the<br \/>\nTribunal stands restored.    The appeal is allowed. No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006 Author: M Katju Bench: S. B. Sinha, Markandey Katju CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5635 of 2006 PETITIONER: Dr. T. A. Quereshi RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/12\/2006 BENCH: S. B. Sinha &amp; Markandey [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-253542","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - 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\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-07T06:58:48+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\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-07T06:58:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1470,\"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\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\",\"name\":\"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-07T06:58:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - 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\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-07T06:58:48+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\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006","datePublished":"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-07T06:58:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006"},"wordCount":1470,"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\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006","name":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-07T06:58:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-t-a-quereshi-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-6-december-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dr. T. A. Quereshi vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, &#8230; on 6 December, 2006"}]},{"@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\/253542","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=253542"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253542\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=253542"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=253542"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=253542"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}