{"id":40008,"date":"1968-08-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1968-08-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968"},"modified":"2015-11-10T00:06:23","modified_gmt":"2015-11-09T18:36:23","slug":"kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","title":{"rendered":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1969 AIR 682, \t\t 1969 SCR (1) 691<\/div>\n
Author: S C.<\/div>\n
Bench: Shah, J.C.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nKAPURCHAND SHRIMAL\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTAX RECOVERY OFFICER, HYDERABAD & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n14\/08\/1968\n\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nBENCH:\nSHAH, J.C.\nRAMASWAMI, V.\nGROVER, A.N.\n\nCITATION:\n 1969 AIR  682\t\t  1969 SCR  (1) 691\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1979 SC1588\t (7)\n\n\nACT:\nIncome-tax Act (11 of 1922)-Hindu undivided family--Defaults\nin payment of tax-Whether Karta can be detained.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nA  Hindu  undivided family committed default in\t payment  of\nincome-tax, and a certificate for recovery of tax due to the\nfamily\twas issued by the Income Tax Office in\texercise  of\nthe power conferred by\trule 76 of Sch. II of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961.  The Tax Recovery Officer directed the arrest and\ndetention  in  prison of the karta of the  family  for\tnon-\npayment\t of  tax.  The Karta then moved a  petition  in\t the\nHigh  Court  of Andhra Pradesh challenging his detention  on\nthe  ground that he was not a defaulter.  The  petition\t was\nrejected.   The\t Karta appealed.  He also moved\t a  petition\nunder  Art. 32 of the Constitution in the Supreme Court\t for\nan order for his release from custody.\nHELD  :--The  Legislature having treated a  Hindu  undivided\nfamily\tas  a taxable entity distinct  from  the  individual\nmembers constituting it,. and proceedings,for assessment and\nrecovery  of  tax  having  been\t taken!\t against  the  Hindu\nundivided  family,  it\twas not open  to  the  Tax  Recovery\nOfficer\t to initiate proceedings against the manager of\t the\nHindu  undivided family for his arrest and  detention.\t The\nmanager\t by virtue of his status is competent  to  represent\nthe  Hindu undivided family, but on that account  he  cannot\nfor  the purpose of s. 222 of the Act of 1961 be  deemed  to\nbe.  the assessee when assessment is made against the  Hindu\nundivided family and certificate for recovery is also issued\nagainst the family. [695 B-D]\nFor the purposes of cl. (a) of s. 2(7)\tthe  person  against\nwhom, any proceeding under the Act has been taken is  deemed\nan assessee:  but that postulates that the proceeding should\nbe lawfully taken against the person before he may be deemed\nto  be an assessee for the purpose of s. 222 or r. 2 and  r.\n73.   There  is\t no provision in the  Act  which  deems\t the\nmanager to be the assessee for the purpose of assessment and\nrecovery  of  tax, when the income of  the  Hindu  undivided\nfamily of which he is the Manager is assessed to tax. Nor is\nthere  any  provision  in the Act  enabling  the  Income-tax\nOfficer or the Tax Recovery Officer to treat the manager  of\nthe  Hindu  undivided family as an assessee  in\t default  in\nrespect\t of  tax  due by the Hindu  undivided  family.\t The\nLegislature has again made no provision for recovery of\t tax\nby  resort  to the personal property of the manager  of\t the\nHindu undivided family assessed to tax or by his arrest\t and\ndetention for default by  the  family in paying the tax due.\n[695 H696D]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL  APPELLATE\/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeals\tNos.
\n1319 and 1320 of 1966.\n<\/p>\n
Appeals by special leave from the judgments and orders dated
\nFebruary 16, 1966 and February 1, 1966 of the Andhra Pradesh
\nHigh Court in Writ Appeals Nos. 143 of 1966 and 166 of 1965
\nrespectively and Writ Petition No. 103 of 1966.
\n3Sup.C1\/68-13
\n692<\/span>
\nPetition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for\t the
\nenforcement of fundamental rights.\n<\/p>\n
B.C.  Misra,  Om  Prakash Gupta and M.V.  Goswami,  for\t the
\nappellant\/petitioner (in all the matters).
\nB.  Sen\t and R.N. Sachthey, for the respondent (in  all\t the
\nmatters ).\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nShah,  J..  Kapurchand Shrimal\ta  Hindu  undivided  family-
\ncommitted default in payment of income-tax due by it for the
\nassessment   years  1955-56  to\t 1959-60.   The\t  Income-tax
\nOfficer,  Special  Investigation Circle,  Hyderabad,  issued
\ncertificate on ,June 16, 1959, under s. 46 of the Income-tax
\nAct, 1922, fox’ recovery of tax due by the family.  Pursuant
\nto the certificate, properties of the Hindu undivided family
\nmovable\t and  immovable and outstandings were  attached\t for
\nrealizing the tax dues.\n<\/p>\n
In  exercise of the powers conferred by r. 76 of Sch. II  of
\nthe Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tax Recovery Officer  directed
\non  August 10, 1965, that Kapurchand Shrimal manager of\t the
\nfamily\tbe detained in civil prison for fifteen\t days.\t The
\nmanager\t then moved a petition in the High Court  of  Andhra
\nPradesh\t against the order of detention.  The  petition\t was
\nrejected  by a single Judge of the High Court  holding\tthat
\nthe manager had, in contravention of r. 16(2) of Sch. II  of
\nthe  Income-tax Act, 1961, dealt with the properties of\t the
\nfamily\tafter  receiving  notice of the\t issue\tof  the\t tax
\nrecovery  certificate.\t In appeal against that\t order,\t the
\nmanager applied for leave to raise the contention that where
\na Hindu undivided family had committed default in payment of
\nthe tax, its Karta not being the assessee against  whom\t the
\ncertificate  is\t issued,. is not liable to be  detained\t for
\nrecovery of tax due by the Hindu undivided family.  The High
\nCourt declined to allow the contention to be raised and held
\nthat  the manager having acted in contravention of r.  16(2)
\nof  Sch. II of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the ingredients  of
\nr.  73\twere attracted and he was liable to be\tdetained  in
\ncivil  prison.\t A,  day before this order  was\t passed\t the
\nappellant  filed  another  petition under Art.\t226  of\t the
\nConstitution  challenging  the validity of  the\t proceedings
\nagainst\t him  on the ground that he was not  a\t“defaulter”.
\nThat  petition was dismissed by the High Court holding\tthat
\nthe  earlier  judgment\tof the High Court  operated  to\t bar
\ninvestigation into the plea raised.\n<\/p>\n
Appeals\t Nos.  1319 & 1320 of 1966 arise out of\t the  orders
\nmade  by the High Court in the two petitions under Art.\t 226
\nof  the Constitution.  The manager was, after the  order  of
\nthe High
\n693<\/span>
\nCourt,\tarrested  and sent to prison for  six  months.\t The
\nmanager\t  then\t filed\tpetition  under\t Art.  32   of\t the
\nConstitution  praying  for a writ in the  nature  of  habeas
\ncorpus\tfor  an order for his release from  the\t custody  of
\nSuperintendent\tDistrict Prison, Hyderabad. In our  judgment
\nthe  claim  of\tthe  manager that he is\t not  liable  to  be
\narrested  and detained in prison for failure to satisfy\t the
\ntax due by the Hindu undivided family in enforcement of\t the
\ncertificate  issued  under  s. 222 of  the  Income-tax\tAct,
\n1961,, must be upheld.\n<\/p>\n
By virtue of s. 297(2)(j), notwithstanding the repeal of the
\nIndian\tIncome-tax  Act, 1922, any stun payable\t by  way  of
\nincome-tax, super-tax, interest, penalty or otherwise  under
\nthe Income-tax Act, 1922, may be recovered under the Act  of
\n1961, but without prejudice to any action already taken\t for
\nthe   recovery\t of  such  sum\tunder  the   repealed\tAct.
\nProceedings could therefore be taken for recovery of the tax
\ndue for the assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60 by the Hindu
\nundivided family under the Income-tax Act of 1961.   Section
\n220 of Act 1961 deals with payment of tax and the conditions
\nin which an assessee may be deemed to’ be in default.  Under
\nthe Act tax assessed has to be paid within thirty-five\tdays
\nof  the service of a notice of demand: if the amount is\t not
\npaid within the time limited at the place and to the  person
\nmentioned  in the said notice, the assessee shall be  deemed
\nto  be\tin default.  Section 222 provides for the  issue  of
\ncertificate to the Tax Recovery Officer.  It provides, in so
\nfar as it is material:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “(  1 ) When an assessee is in default  or  is
\n\t      deemed to be in default in making a payment of
\n\t      tax, the Income-tax Officer may forward to the
\n\t      Tax  Recovery Officer a certificate under\t his
\n\t      signature specifying the amount of arrears due
\n\t      from  the\t assessee,  and\t the  Tax   Recovery
\n\t      Officer on receipt of such certificate,  shall
\n\t      proceed  to  recover from\t such  assessee\t the
\n\t      amount specified therein by one or more of the
\n\t      modes mentioned below, in accordance with\t the
\n\t      rules laid down in the Second Schedule–\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t   (a) attachment and sale of the assessee’s
\n\t      movable  property;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t   (b) attachment and sale of the assessee’s
\n\t      immovable
\n\t\t   property;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t   (c)\tarrest\tof  the\t assessee  and\t his
\n\t      detention in prison;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t\t   (d)\t appointing  a\treceiver   for\t the
\n\t      management of
\n\t\t   the\tassessee’s  movable  and   immovable
\n\t      properties”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
By  r.\t1  (b)\tof Sch.-II of  the  Income-tax\tAct,   1961,
\n“defaulter””   means   the   assessee\tmentioned   in\t the
\ncertificate.  Rule 2 provides
\n694<\/span>
\nthat  when  a  certificate  has been  received\tby  the\t Tax
\nRecovery Officer from the Income-tax Officer for recovery of
\narrears\t under Sch. II, the Tax Recovery Officer shah  cause
\nto  be\tserved\tupon the defaulter a  notice  requiring\t the
\ndefaulter  to  pay the amount specified in  the\t certificate
\nwithin\tfifteen days from the date of service of the  notice
\nand  intimating\t that in default steps would  b.e  taken  to
\nrealise\t the  amount under the Schedule.  Rule\t16  provides
\nthat where a notice has been served on a defaulter under  r.
\n2, the defaulter shall not be competent to mortgage, charge,
\nlease  or otherwise deal with any property belonging to\t him
\nexcept\t with  the permission of the Tax  Recovery  Officer.
\nRule 73 provides that no order for the arrest and  detention
\nin  civil prison of a defaulter shah be made unless the\t Tax
\nRecovery  Officer has, issued and served a notice  upon\t the
\ndefaulter  calling upon him to appear on the date  specified
\nin  the\t notice\t and  to show cause why\t he  should  not  be
\ncommitted  to the civil prison, and unless the Tax  Recovery
\nOfficer, for reasons to be recorded in writing, is satisfied
\nand  that  the\tdefaulter  with\t the  object  or  effect  of
\nobstructing the execution of the certificate, has, after the
\nreceipt of the certificate in the office of the Tax Recovery
\nOfficer, dishonestly transferred, concealed, or removed\t any
\npart of his property; and (b) that the defaulter has, or has
\nhad  since the receipt of the certificate in the  office  of
\nthe  Tax Recovery Officer, the means to pay the\t arrears  or
\nsome substantial part thereof and refuses or neglects or has
\nrefused or neglected to pay the same.  Rule 76 provides\t for
\nthe  issue of an order of detention of the defaulter by\t the
\nTax Recovery Officer.\n<\/p>\n
The  scheme  of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is  to  treat\t the
\nassessee  failing  to  pay the tax  due\t within\t the  period
\nprescribed  a defaulter.  The Income-tax Officer may,  where
\nthe    assessee\t  is  found  to\t be  in\t default,  issue   a
\ncertificate for recovery and forward it to the Tax  Recovery
\nOfficer\t specifying  the  amount of  arrears  due  from\t the
\nassessee.  The amount due may be recovered by resort to\t any
\none  or more of the four modes prescribed by s. 222  of\t the
\nAct.  If the defaulter fails to comply with a notice  issued
\nby  the Tax Recovery Officer requiring the defaulter to\t pay
\nthe amount within fifteen days from the date of the  service
\nof the notice, proceedings for recovery may be taken against
\nthe assessee for recovery of ‘the tax.\tBut under the scheme
\nof the Act and the Rules, the assessee alone may be  treated
\nin  default.   The Act and the Rules  contemplate  that\t the
\nnotice for payment of the tax arrears may be issued  against
\nthe assessee, and proceedings for recovery of the tax may be
\ntaken against the assessee alone. Under the Income-tax\tAct,
\n1961, a Hindu undivided family is a distinct taxable entity.
\napart  from  the  individual  members  who  constitute\tthat
\nfamily.\t Section 4 of the Income-tax Act charges tax for any
\nassessment year, the total income of the previous
\n695<\/span>
\nyear  of every person and ‘person’ is defined in s. 2 (31  )
\nas  including–(i)  an\tindividual, (u)\t a  Hindu  undivided
\nfamily,\t (iii) a company, (iv ) a firm, (v ) an\t association
\nof persons or a body of individuals, whether Incorporated or
\nnot,  (vi)  a  local authority and  (vii)  every  artificial
\njuridical  person, not falling within any of  the  preceding
\nsub-clauses.\tThe  Legislature  having  treated  a   Hindu
\nundivided  family  as  a taxable entity\t distinct  from\t the
\nindividual  members  constituting it,  and  proceedings\t for
\nassessment and recovery of tax having been taken against the
\nHindu undivided family, it was not open to the Tax  Recovery
\nOfficer\t to initiate proceedings against the manager of\t the
\nHindu undivided family for his arrest and detention.  It  is
\ntrue that if properties of the family movable and  immovable
\nare  to be attached, proceedings may be started against\t the
\nHindu undivided family and the manager represents the family
\nin proceedings before the Tax Recovery Officer.\t But by\t the
\nclearest  implication of the statute the assessee alone\t may
\nbe  deemed  to be in default for  non-payment of   tax,\t and
\nliability to arrest and detention on failure to pay the\t tax
\ndue is also incurred by the assessee alone.  The manager  by
\nvirtue\tof  his status is competent to represent  the  Hindu
\nundivided  family,  but on that account he  cannot  for\t the
\npurpose\t of  s. 222 of the Act of 1961 be deemed to  be\t the
\nassessee  when\tthe  assessment is made\t against  the  Hindu
\nundivided  family  and certificate for\trecovery  is  issued
\nagainst the family.\n<\/p>\n
Counsel\t for the Revenue invited our attention to s.  140(b)
\nand s. 282(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in support of his
\ncontention  that  when\ttax is assessed\t against  the  Hindu
\nundivided  family  there  is  no  distinction  between\t the
\nrepresentative\tstatus of the manager of the family and\t his
\npersonal  status.  Section 140(b) authorises the manager  in
\nthe case of a Hindu undivided farofly to sign and verify the
\nreturn\tof  income, and s. 282(2) provides for the  mode  of
\nservice\t of  notice  or requisition issued  under  the\tAct,
\namongst\t others,  against  a  Hindu  undivided\tfamily.\t But
\nbecause\t  the  manager\tof  a  Hindu  undivided\t family\t  is
\nauthorised  to\tsign and verify the return of income  and  a
\nnotice\tunder  the Act could be served upon him when  it  is
\naddressed  to a Hindu undivided family and such\t service  is
\ntreated\t as service upon the Hindu undivided family for\t the
\npurpose\t of the Act, the manager cannot be deemed to be\t the
\nassessee where the income assessed is of the Hindu undivided
\nfamily.\t  The  expression ‘assessee’ under s. 2(7)  means  a
\nperson by whom any tax or any other sum of money is  payable
\nunder the Act, and includes–(a) every person in respect  of
\nwhom  any  proceeding under the Act has been taken  for\t the
\nassessment  of\this  income or of the income  of  any  other
\nperson in respect of which he is assessable, or of the\tloss
\nsustained  by him or by such other person, or of the  amount
\nof  refund  due to him or to such other\t person;  (b)  every
\nperson who is deemed
\n696<\/span>
\nto be an assessee under any provisions of the Act; (c) every
\nperson who is deemed to be an assessee in default under\t any
\nprovisions  of the Act.\t For purposes of cl. (a) the  person
\nagainst whom any proceeding under the Act has been taken  is
\ndeemed an assessee: but that necessarily postulates that the
\nproceeding  should  be\tlawfully taken\tagainst\t the  person
\nbefore he could be deemed to be an assessee for the  purpose
\nof  s.. 222.or r. 2 and r.73.  There is no provision in\t the
\nAct  which  deems the manager to be the\t assessee,  for\t the
\npurpose\t of assessment and recovery of tax, when the  income
\nof the Hindu undivided family of which he is the manager  is
\nassessed  to tax.  Nor is there any provision  enabling\t the
\nIncome-tax Officer or the Tax Recovery Officer to treat\t the
\nmanager\t of  the Hindu undivided family as  an\tassessee  in
\ndefault\t under\tthe  provisions of  the\t Act.\tSection\t 160
\nprovides for treating a person as a representative  assessee
\nand  s. 161  prescribes\t the liability of  a  representative
\nassessee.   Section  179  makes\t a  special  provision\t for
\nrendering the Directors of private company in liquidation to
\nbe jointly and severally liable for the payment of tax which
\ncannot\tbe recovered from the assets of the private  company
\nin liquidation.\t The Legislature has made no such  provision
\nfor  recovery of tax by resort to the personal\tproperty  of
\nthe manager of the Hindu undivided family, or by his  arrest
\nand  detention for default by the family in paying  the\t tax
\ndue.\n<\/p>\n
Sections 276, 276A, 277 and 278 on which reliance was placed
\nby  counsel for the Revenue in support of his argument\talso
\ndo  not\t assist\t him.  These sections  occur  in  a  chapter
\nrelating to penalties, and they seek to penalise failure  to
\ncarry  out  specific provisions mentioned therein.   We\t are
\nunable\tto  hold  that the expression “person” in  ss.\t276,
\n276A  and 277 is used m the sense in which it is defined  in
\ns.  2  (31  ) of the Act.  For each specific  act  which  is
\ndeemed\t to  be\t an  offence  under  those  provisions,\t  an
\nindividual  who without reasonable cause or excuse fails  to
\ndo  the\t acts  prescribed by statute or\t acts  in  a  manner
\ncontrary to the statute or makes a declaration on oath which
\nhe  believed to be false or does not believe to be true,  is
\nmade  liable  to  be punished.\tSection\t 278  penalises\t the
\nabetment  or  inducing\tany person to make  and\t deliver  an
\naccount,  statement  of declaration relating to\t any  income
\nchargeable  to tax which is false and which he either  knows
\nto be false or does not believe to. be true.  In the context
\nin  which the expression “person” occurs in ss.\t 276,  276A,
\n277 and 278, there can be no doubt that it seeks to penalise
\nonly  those individuals who fail to carry out the duty\tcase
\nby the specific provisions of the statute. or are  otherwise
\nresponsible for the acts done.\tFor the default of the Hindu
\nundivided  family, therefore. in payment of tax.  the  Karta
\ncannot be arrested and detained in prison.\n<\/p>\n
697<\/span><\/p>\n
The High Court, we think, took a somewhat technical view  in
\ndeclining to allow the contention raised by the appellant in
\nthe first writ petition presented before the High Court that
\nhe  was\t not liable to be arrested and imprisoned  for\tnon-
\npayment\t of the tax arrears, since he was not  an  assessee.
\nand  then in treating the judgment of the High Court in\t the
\nfirst writ petition operating constructively as res judicata
\nin the second petition.\n<\/p>\n
The appeals are allowed and the order of detention passed by
\nthe Tax Recovery Officer against the appellant is   declared
\nunauthorized.\tNo order in Petition No. 103 of\t 1966.\t The
\nappellant will be entitled to his costs in Appeal No..\t1320
\nof 1966 in all the three Courts.  There will be no order  as
\nto  costs in Appeal No. 1319 of 1966 and Writ  Petition\t No.
\n103 of 1966.\n<\/p>\n
Y.P.\t\t\t\t\t   Appeals allowed.\n698<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968 Equivalent citations: 1969 AIR 682, 1969 SCR (1) 691 Author: S C. Bench: Shah, J.C. PETITIONER: KAPURCHAND SHRIMAL Vs. RESPONDENT: TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, HYDERABAD & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14\/08\/1968 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. RAMASWAMI, V. […]<\/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-40008","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nKapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - 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\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\" \/>\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=\"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-09T18:36:23+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=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968\",\"datePublished\":\"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-09T18:36:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\"},\"wordCount\":2588,\"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\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\",\"name\":\"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-09T18:36:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968\"}]},{\"@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":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - 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\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-09T18:36:23+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":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968","datePublished":"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-09T18:36:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968"},"wordCount":2588,"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\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968","name":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & ... on 14 August, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1968-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-09T18:36:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapurchand-shrimal-vs-tax-recovery-officer-hyderabad-on-14-august-1968#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kapurchand Shrimal vs Tax Recovery Officer, Hyderabad & … on 14 August, 1968"}]},{"@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\/40008","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=40008"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40008\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40008"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40008"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40008"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}