{"id":67475,"date":"2008-06-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008"},"modified":"2018-05-12T06:20:26","modified_gmt":"2018-05-12T00:50:26","slug":"mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice H.B.Antani,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nTAXAP\/373\/1999\t 5\/ 5\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. 373 of 1999\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \n\n\n \n\n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA \n\n \n\n \nAND\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI \n\n \n\n \n==========================================\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\t  \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================\n \n\nMAHALAXMI\nFABRIC MILLS LTD. - APPELLANT \n\n \n\nVERSUS\n\n\n \n\nASSISTANT\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX  - RESPONDENT \n\n \n\n==========================================Appearance\n: \nMR JP SHAH for the Appellant.\n \nMR MANISH R BHATT for the Respondent.\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\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\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\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 17\/06\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)<\/p>\n<p>1.\t\tThis<br \/>\nappeal was admitted after formulating the following substantial<br \/>\nquestion of law:\n<\/p>\n<p>?SWhether, on the facts and in<br \/>\nthe circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have allowed<br \/>\n80HHC relief in respect of the ?Sprofits derived by the assessee<br \/>\nfrom the export of goods?? without reducing the said profits by the<br \/>\namount of carried forward depreciation and investment allowance???\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\t\tThe<br \/>\nAssessment Year in question is 1991-92, the relevant Previous Year<br \/>\nbeing Financial Year ended on 31st March, 1990.  The<br \/>\nappellant-assessee claimed deduction under Section 80HHC of the<br \/>\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (?Sthe Act??) at a sum of Rs.<br \/>\n30,89,519\/=.  The Assessing Officer restricted the claim to<br \/>\nRs.21,75,700\/=.  The difference relatable to sum of Rs. 17,75,218\/=<br \/>\ncomprised of unabsorbed depreciation carried forward and investment<br \/>\nallowance.  According to the Assessing Officer, the profits derived<br \/>\nby the assessee from export of goods were required to be reduced by<br \/>\ndeducting the amount of unabsorbed depreciation carried forward and<br \/>\ninvestment allowance.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\t\tBeing<br \/>\naggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the<br \/>\nCommissioner (Appeals), who, for the reasons stated in his order,<br \/>\nconfirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.  In Second Appeal<br \/>\nalso, the assessee could not succeed.  The Tribunal followed the<br \/>\ndecision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income<br \/>\nTax Vs. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Limited, [1997]<br \/>\n224 ITR 604 to hold that before allowing any deduction under<br \/>\nChapter VI-A of the Act, Gross Total Income had to be computed in<br \/>\naccordance with the provisions of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\t\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Advocate for the appellant Shri Manish J. Shah very fairly<br \/>\ninvited attention to the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of<br \/>\nSynco Industries Limited Vs. Assessing Officer (Income-Tax) And<br \/>\nAnother, [2008] 299 ITR 444 and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.<br \/>\nShirke Construction Equipment Limited [2007] 291 ITR 380 to<br \/>\nsubmit that the controversy is no longer res<br \/>\nintegra.  According to the learned Advocate, in light of the<br \/>\naforesaid two decisions of the Apex Court, the question is required<br \/>\nto be answered against the appellant-assessee.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe case of Synco Industries Limited Vs. Assessing Officer<br \/>\n(Income-Tax) and Another (supra),<br \/>\nthe Apex Court has discussed the<br \/>\nscheme of the Act with reference to the provisions of Section 80B (5)<br \/>\nof the Act which defines ?Sgross total income??.  The controversy<br \/>\nbefore the Court was in relation to working out the deductions under<br \/>\nSections 80HH and 80I of the Act ?  whether such deductions are<br \/>\nallowable before setting off the business losses of earlier years or<br \/>\nnot.  The Supreme Court has come to the conclusion that if the<br \/>\nresultant figure, after setting off the business losses of earlier<br \/>\nyears, is nil, no deduction under Section 80HH and 80I can be<br \/>\ngranted.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\t\tIn the case of Commissioner<br \/>\nof Income Tax Vs. Shirke Construction Equipment Limited (supra),<br \/>\nthe Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether Section 80AB<br \/>\nof the Act can be applied to Section 80HHC of the Act and whether the<br \/>\nprofits under Section 80HHC of the Act are required to be computed<br \/>\nafter setting off unabsorbed business losses of earlier years under<br \/>\nSection 72 of the Act.  The Supreme Court, after referring to its<br \/>\nearlier decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Limited Vs. Deputy<br \/>\nCommissioner of Income Tax, [2004] 266 ITR 521, has reiterated as<br \/>\nunder:\n<\/p>\n<p>?SSection 80AB is also in<br \/>\nChapter VI-A.  It starts with the words &#8216;where any deduction is<br \/>\nrequired to be made or allowed under any section of this Chapter&#8217;.<br \/>\nThis would include Section 80HHC.  Section 80AB further provides that<br \/>\n&#8216;notwithstanding anything contained in that section&#8217;.  Thus, Section<br \/>\n80AB has been given an overriding effect over all other sections in<br \/>\nChapter VI-A.  Section 80HHC does not provide that its provisions are<br \/>\nto prevail over Section 80AB or over any other provision of the Act.<br \/>\nSection 80HHC would thus be governed by Section 80AB.  The decisions<br \/>\nof the Bombay High Court and the Kerala High Court to the contrary<br \/>\ncannot be said to be the correct law.  Section 80AB makes it clear<br \/>\nthat the computation of income has to be in accordance with the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Act, then not only profits but also losses have to<br \/>\nbe taken into consideration.??\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\t\tIn the aforesaid set of<br \/>\ncircumstances, it is apparent that in light of the enunciation of law<br \/>\nby the Apex Court, no error can be found in the impugned order of the<br \/>\nTribunal.  The Tribunal was justified in reducing the profits by the<br \/>\namount of carried forward depreciation and investment allowance<br \/>\nbefore allowing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the question is answered in the negative i.e. in favour<br \/>\nof the Revenue and against the assessee.  The appeal is dismissed<br \/>\naccordingly with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>[D.\n<\/p>\n<p>A. MEHTA, J.]<\/p>\n<p>[H.\n<\/p>\n<p>B. ANTANI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>\/shamnath<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice H.B.Antani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAP\/373\/1999 5\/ 5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 373 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA AND HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI ========================================== 1 Whether Reporters of [&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-67475","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - 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\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-12T00:50:26+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\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-12T00:50:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":811,\"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\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-12T00:50:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - 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\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-12T00:50:26+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\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-12T00:50:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008"},"wordCount":811,"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\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008","name":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-12T00:50:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahalaxmi-vs-assistant-on-17-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mahalaxmi vs Assistant on 17 June, 2008"}]},{"@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\/67475","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=67475"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67475\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}