{"id":63332,"date":"2009-11-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009"},"modified":"2016-08-29T07:10:03","modified_gmt":"2016-08-29T01:40:03","slug":"shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 26509 of 2009(G)\n\n\n1. SHAJUDEEN.E.A., REHMATH MANZIL,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR),\n\n3. THE ADALATH TEAM NO.II HEADED BY THE\n\n4. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.BOBBY JOHN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :17\/11\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                     C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.\n\n                     ------------------------------\n                  W.P.(C).No.26509 OF 2009\n                     ------------------------------\n\n          Dated this the 17th day of November, 2009\n\n\n                         J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>                         &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-\n<\/p>\n<p>      1.   Challenge in this writ petition is against assessment<\/p>\n<p>completed under the provision of Section 17D of the Kerala<\/p>\n<p>General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST Act). A Division Bench of<\/p>\n<p>this court in a batch of cases filed challenging validity of Section<\/p>\n<p>17 D, observed that if exorbitant demand of tax is as a result of<\/p>\n<p>arbitrary orders issued, which according to the petitioner are<\/p>\n<p>issued in violation of natural justice and without following the<\/p>\n<p>mandatory procedure provided under section 17D, it is not as if<\/p>\n<p>petitioners are totally without remedy. The constitutional remedy<\/p>\n<p>under Article 226 is available in such cases and it will be open to<\/p>\n<p>parties seeking relief against such orders to approach this court<\/p>\n<p>and in such cases it is within the power of this court to mould<\/p>\n<p>appropriate reliefs. With respect to the procedure to be followed<\/p>\n<p>while passing assessment under section 17 D the Division Bench<\/p>\n<p>observed as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>           &#8220;Even though we have upheld the validity of the<br \/>\n      statutory provisions, we are unable to uphold the<br \/>\n      impugned assessments for the simple reason that the<br \/>\n      none of the assessments challenged in the Writ<br \/>\n      appeals or in the Writ petitions was completed in<br \/>\n      accordance with the procedure contemplated under<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.(C).26509\/09-G                2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      section 17D. It is clear from clause (g) of Section 17 D<br \/>\n      (2) that the team constituted under section 17 D<br \/>\n      should fix the venue and date of hearing and hold<br \/>\n      sitting to hear the parties after issuing notice in<br \/>\n      advance to dealers concerned. Further, information in<br \/>\n      this regard should be published in local media as well.<br \/>\n      It is provided in Sub section (3) of Section 17 D that<br \/>\n      all assessments under Fast Track Method should be<br \/>\n      unanimous decision signed by all team members. It is<br \/>\n      very clear from the scheme that all the team members<br \/>\n      should sit together, consider the returns filed,<br \/>\n      accounts and records produced, hear the parties or<br \/>\n      their representatives and suggest proposal for<br \/>\n      assessment. If an assessment by consent can be<br \/>\n      passed, then assessment order should be passed in<br \/>\n      accordance with the terms agreed in first sitting itself.<br \/>\n      The assessments that could be completed in the first<br \/>\n      sitting are cases where team of Assessing Officers<br \/>\n      accept the returns filed or with such additions which<br \/>\n      the party agrees. On the other hand, if assessment is<br \/>\n      proposed in deviation with turnover returned or<br \/>\n      against additions over and above if any agreed by the<br \/>\n      parties, then it is for the very same team to issue pre-<br \/>\n      assessment notice containing proposal for assessment<br \/>\n      and the same should be signed by all of them. The<br \/>\n      party should be given sufficient time to file objections<br \/>\n      and the next date of public hearing by the committee<br \/>\n      should be informed to the party. Assessment has to be<br \/>\n      complete after hearing the party by team on the<br \/>\n      objection filed to the pre-assessment notice and in<br \/>\n      order to have a binding assessment, the assessment<br \/>\n      should be one completed with unanimous agreement<br \/>\n      of all the team members, In fact, ex-parte assessment<br \/>\n      is contemplated only when parties who are served<br \/>\n      notice informing the venue and date of hearing fail to<br \/>\n      appear. Here again, we are of the view that there is no<br \/>\n      harm in giving one more opportunity, if the team of<br \/>\n      officers feel that the party is not absenting<br \/>\n      deliberately. Since in all these cases assessments are<br \/>\n      completed by issuing pre-assessment notice by<br \/>\n      individual officers, we feel that the procedure<br \/>\n      contemplated and stated by us above is not strictly<br \/>\n      followed and so much so, orders passed cannot be<br \/>\n      sustained under the provision of Section 17 D. We,<br \/>\n      therefore allow the writ appeals and writ petitions in<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.(C).26509\/09-G               3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      part by vacating the impugned assessment orders, but<br \/>\n      with direction to the assessment team to complete the<br \/>\n      assessment afresh under section 17 D within a period<br \/>\n      of three months from the date of receipt of copy of<br \/>\n      this judgment after issuing notice to all parties and<br \/>\n      after hearing their objections. We make it clear that<br \/>\n      each and every objection raised by the parties in the<br \/>\n      reply to pre-assessment notice should be considered<br \/>\n      and unanimous decision should be taken by the team<br \/>\n      members. We do not want to examine the other issues<br \/>\n      raised in some of the cases like challenge against<br \/>\n      other statutory provisions, challenge against penalty<br \/>\n      orders etc. These issues are left open. We leave<br \/>\n      freedom to the parties to challenge the penalty orders<br \/>\n      before statutory authorities   because those are not<br \/>\n      issued under section 17 D. So far as challenge against<br \/>\n      other statutory provision are concerned, we leave it<br \/>\n      open to the parties to raise any such challenge, if<br \/>\n      required, after completion of assessments afresh as<br \/>\n      stated above&#8221;.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      2.    In view of the directions contained in the Division<\/p>\n<p>Bench Judgment cited supra <a href=\"\/doc\/263230\/\">(Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. V.<\/p>\n<p>Assistant Commissioner and others<\/a>: Writ Appeal No.1714\/2009 and<\/p>\n<p>connected cases Jt:dt:8\/10\/ 2009), I am of the opinion that the<\/p>\n<p>impugned assessment in this writ petition is not sustainable and<\/p>\n<p>hence matter needs fresh disposal by the authority concerned.<\/p>\n<p>      3.     Therefore the writ petition is allowed quashing the<\/p>\n<p>impugned assessment finalised under section 17 D and also the<\/p>\n<p>consequential demand raised if any for realisation of amounts<\/p>\n<p>covered under such assessment. The respondent concerned,<\/p>\n<p>(The Fast Track Team) is directed to take fresh steps necessary<\/p>\n<p>for completing assessment taking into consideration of the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.(C).26509\/09-G               4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>directions contained in the Division Bench judgment. The fresh<\/p>\n<p>assessment as directed above shall be completed as early as<\/p>\n<p>possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date<\/p>\n<p>of receipt of the copy of this judgment, after affording adequate<\/p>\n<p>opportunities to the petitioner as directed above.<\/p>\n<p>                                 C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p>Okb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 26509 of 2009(G) 1. SHAJUDEEN.E.A., REHMATH MANZIL, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, &#8230; Respondent 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), 3. THE ADALATH TEAM NO.II HEADED BY THE 4. THE SALES [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63332","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - 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\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-29T01:40:03+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\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-29T01:40:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":958,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-29T01:40:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 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":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - 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\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-29T01:40:03+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\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-29T01:40:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009"},"wordCount":958,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009","name":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-29T01:40:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shajudeen-e-a-vs-the-commercial-tax-officer-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shajudeen.E.A. vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 17 November, 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\/63332","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=63332"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63332\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63332"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63332"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63332"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}