{"id":66406,"date":"2010-03-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010"},"modified":"2019-04-06T04:17:03","modified_gmt":"2019-04-05T22:47:03","slug":"the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The vs The on 8 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nTAXAP\/138\/2009\t 8\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nTAX\nAPPEAL No. 138 of 2009\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA  \nHONOURABLE\nMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n \n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nTHE\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nHIMGIRI\nFOODS LIMITED - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nMR BHATT, SR. COUNSEL with MRS MAUNA M BHATT\nfor Appellant(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Opponent(s) : 1, \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 08\/03\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI)<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthis appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the<br \/>\n\tAct), appellant-revenue has proposed the following question stated<br \/>\n\tto be a substantial question of law arising from the impugned order<br \/>\n\tof Tribunal dated 25th January 2007 of the Income Tax<br \/>\n\tAppellate Tribunal:\n<\/p>\n<p> Whether<br \/>\nthe Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the<br \/>\norder passed by the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to<br \/>\nprocess revised return filed by the assessee u\/s 143(1B) of the Act<br \/>\nthough the same was filed after the original return had already been<br \/>\nprocessed u\/s 143(1)(a) ?\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tassessment year is 1995-96.  The respondent-assessee had filed its<br \/>\n\toriginal return of income for the assessment year under<br \/>\n\tconsideration on 30th November 1995 disclosing total<br \/>\n\tincome of Rs.21,46,600\/-. The said return was filed in time and was<br \/>\n\tprocessed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act.  Within a period of<br \/>\n\tone year from the relevant assessment year, the assessee on the<br \/>\n\tbasis of the opinion of the Chartered Accountant and Tax Expert,<br \/>\n\tfiled a revised return on 21st January 1997 declaring<br \/>\n\tbusiness loss of Rs.12,08,686\/-. The revised return was occasioned<br \/>\n\tbecause certain expenses which were of revenue nature remained to be<br \/>\n\tclaimed in the original return as they were debited to pre-operative<br \/>\n\texpenses. The Assessing Officer did not process the revised return<br \/>\n\tunder section 143(1B) of the Act and intimated the assessee that he<br \/>\n\twas not acting upon the revised return as assessment under section<br \/>\n\t143(1) (a) was already completed. In the meantime, the assessee<br \/>\n\tmoved an application under section 119 of the Act before the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat-1, Ahmedabad on 27th<br \/>\n\tDecember 1999, requesting for issuance of directions to the<br \/>\n\tAssessing Officer to consider the revised return filed under section<br \/>\n\t139(5) of the Act. The said application came to be rejected by<br \/>\n\tCommissioner who also held that the claim of the assessee was devoid<br \/>\n\tof any merit and that, section 139(5) was not intended to provide a<br \/>\n\tloophole for reducing the tax liability by extra legal means. The<br \/>\n\tassessee, thereafter moved an application dated 30th<br \/>\n\tMarch, 2000 under section 154 of the Act before the Assessing<br \/>\n\tOfficer requesting him to take cognizance of the revised return<br \/>\n\tunder the provisions of section 143(1B) of the Act.  The Assessing<br \/>\n\tOfficer rejected the said application holding that the revised<br \/>\n\treturn had been filed beyond the time limit stipulated under section<br \/>\n\t139(5) of the Act. While rejecting the said application the<br \/>\n\tAssessing Officer also placed reliance upon the order passed by<br \/>\n\tCommissioner under section 119 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tassessee carried the matter in appeal before Commissioner (Appeals)<br \/>\n\twho recorded a finding that the revised return was filed on 21st<br \/>\n\tJanuary 1997, but rejected the application on other grounds. The<br \/>\n\tassessee carried the matter in further appeal before Tribunal, who,<br \/>\n\tvide the impugned order dated 25th January 2007 allowed<br \/>\n\tthe appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tM. R .Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant<br \/>\n\trevenue supported the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the<br \/>\n\tCommissioner, (Appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p>As<br \/>\n\tcan be seen from the impugned order of the Tribunal, the Tribunal<br \/>\n\thas held that under section 143(1B) of the Act, it is permissible<br \/>\n\tfor an assessee to file a revised return under section 139(5) after<br \/>\n\tissuance of the intimation and that the intimation already sent is<br \/>\n\trequired to be amended on the basis of the revised return; that the<br \/>\n\tsaid provision does not permit the Assessing Officer to consider the<br \/>\n\tvalidity of the claim made by the assessee under section 139(5) of<br \/>\n\tthe Act. The Tribunal recorded as a matter of fact that the revised<br \/>\n\treturn which was filed on 21st January, 1997 was within a<br \/>\n\tperiod of one year from the date of filing of the original return.<br \/>\n\tThe Tribunal further found that although intimation as envisaged<br \/>\n\tunder section 143(1) had been sent to the assessee prior to the<br \/>\n\tfiling of the revised return, the assessment had not been completed<br \/>\n\tby the Assessing Officer by that date. The Tribunal was of the view<br \/>\n\tthat an intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act cannot be<br \/>\n\tregarded to be an assessment and that if intimation under section<br \/>\n\t143(1)(a) is treated as an assessment the provisions of section<br \/>\n\t143(1B) would be rendered nugatory. The Tribunal held that section<br \/>\n\t143(1B) makes it obligatory on the part of the Assessing Officer to<br \/>\n\tprocess the revised return provided it is filed within the time<br \/>\n\tpermitted under the Act and to revise the intimation that has<br \/>\n\talready been issued by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal observed<br \/>\n\tthat in the order made under section 154, the Assessing Officer had<br \/>\n\tnot held that the revised return was invalid but had rejected the<br \/>\n\tapplication on the ground that the return had been filed beyond<br \/>\n\ttime, whereas on the basis of evidence and the material filed before<br \/>\n\tit, the Tribunal has found as a matter of fact that the revised<br \/>\n\treturn had been filed within the time permitted under section 139(5)<br \/>\n\tof the Act. The Tribunal, accordingly held that once the revised<br \/>\n\treturn was filed within time, the Assessing Officer was bound to<br \/>\n\tprocess it under section 143(1B) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sub-section<br \/>\n\t(5) of section 139 provides that if any person, having furnished a<br \/>\n\treturn under sub-section (1), or in pursuance of a notice issued<br \/>\n\tunder sub-section (1) of section 142, discovers any omission or<br \/>\n\twrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time<br \/>\n\tbefore the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant<br \/>\n\tassessment year or before the completion of assessment, whichever is<br \/>\n\tearlier.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe present case the assessment year is 1995-96. It is an admitted<br \/>\n\tposition that only intimation under section 143(1) (a) had been<br \/>\n\tissued and that the assessment had not been completed when the<br \/>\n\trevised return came to filed. Hence, the assessee was entitled to<br \/>\n\tfurnish the revised return at any time before the expiry of one year<br \/>\n\tfrom the end of assessment year 1995-96. From the facts noted<br \/>\n\thereinabove it is apparent that the revised return was filed on 21st<br \/>\n\tJanuary, 1997 which is well within the prescribed period.\n<\/p>\n<p>Section<br \/>\n\t143(1B) as it stood between 1.4.1989 to 31.5.1999, insofar as the<br \/>\n\tsame is relevant for the purpose of the present appeal reads thus:\n<\/p>\n<p> (1B)<br \/>\nWhere an assessee furnishes a revised return under sub-section (5) of<br \/>\nsection 139 after the issue of an intimation, or the grant of refund,<br \/>\nif any, under sub-section (1) of this section, the provisions of<br \/>\nsub-sections (1) and (1A) of this section shall apply in relation to<br \/>\nsuch revised return and-\n<\/p>\n<p>the<br \/>\n\tintimation already sent for any income-tax, additional tax or<br \/>\n\tinterest shall be amended on the basis of the said revised return<br \/>\n\tand where any amount payable by way of income-tax, additional<br \/>\n\tincome-tax or interest specified in the said intimation has already<br \/>\n\tbeen paid by the assessee then, if any such amendment has the effect<br \/>\n\tof-\n<\/p>\n<p>enhancing<br \/>\n\t\tthe amount already paid, the intimation amended under this clause<br \/>\n\t\tshall be sent to the assessee specifying the excess amount payable<br \/>\n\t\tby him and such intimation shall be deemed to be notice of demand<br \/>\n\t\tissued under section 156 and all the provisions of this Act shall<br \/>\n\t\tapply accordingly;\n<\/p>\n<p>reducing<br \/>\n\t\tthe amount already paid, the excess amount shall be refunded to the<br \/>\n\t\tassessee;\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)<br \/>\nxxxx.\n<\/p>\n<p>On<br \/>\n\ta plain reading of section 143(1B) it is apparent that the provision<br \/>\n\tmandates that if after the issuance of intimation, a revised return<br \/>\n\tis furnished by an assessee under sub-section (5) section 139 it is<br \/>\n\tincumbent upon the Assessing Officer to process the revised return<br \/>\n\tand amend the intimation issued under section 143(1)(a) on the basis<br \/>\n\tof the revised return. At this stage there is no question of going<br \/>\n\tinto the validity of the return filed under section 139(5) of the<br \/>\n\tAct, if the revised return is filed within the prescribed period of<br \/>\n\tlimitation.  An intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act cannot<br \/>\n\tbe equated with an assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Act<br \/>\n\tand the Assessing Officer cannot refuse to process the revised<br \/>\n\treturn and modify the intimation in accordance with section 143(1B)<br \/>\n\tof the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe aforesaid facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the<br \/>\n\timpugned order of the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so<br \/>\n\tas to warrant interference. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed in<br \/>\n\tabsence of any question of law, as proposed or otherwise, much less<br \/>\n\tany substantial question.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t[D.A.MEHTA,<br \/>\nJ.]<\/p>\n<p>[HARSHA<br \/>\nDEVANI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>parmar*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court The vs The on 8 March, 2010 Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAP\/138\/2009 8\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 138 of 2009 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-66406","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - 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\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-05T22:47:03+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The vs The on 8 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-05T22:47:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1405,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\",\"name\":\"The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-05T22:47:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The vs The on 8 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - 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\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-05T22:47:03+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-05T22:47:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010"},"wordCount":1405,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010","name":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-05T22:47:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The vs The on 8 March, 2010"}]},{"@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\/66406","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=66406"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66406\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66406"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66406"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66406"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}