{"id":97068,"date":"1984-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1984-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984"},"modified":"2018-03-18T00:43:21","modified_gmt":"2018-03-17T19:13:21","slug":"income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","title":{"rendered":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984"},"content":{"rendered":"
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Cochin<\/div>\n
Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1985 11 ITD 620 Coch<\/div>\n
Bench: K Menon, A Satyanarayana<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
K.B. Menon, Judicial Member<\/p>\n
1.  This appeal by the department and the cross-objection by the assessee relate to the assessment year 1967-68. The first assessment in the case was set aside by the AAC and a fresh assessment was made on 31-7-1973. The controversy in the present appeal relates to two rectification orders passed with regard to the assessment order made on 31-7-1973, which may conveniently be referred to as the original assessment.\n<\/p>\n
2. The assessee owned three tractors. With regard to two tractors, the assessee had paid interest during the relevant accounting period. In the original assessment, depreciation was allowed only on the written down value of the tractors. The interest paid was not capitalised and added to the WDV and, consequently, no depreciation was allowed on this amount. On 4-3-1976, the assessee applied for rectification of certain mistakes in the original assessment, order. The rectification order was passed by the ITO under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on 17-3-1976, wherein the ITO added the interest paid on the balance of the unpaid purchase price to the WDV and allowed depreciation at 25 per cent on the total amount. The interest so added to the WDV came to Rs. 19,632. He made this addition in the case of all the three tractors and allowed depreciation accordingly. Subsequently, on 22-11-1978, the ITO passed another rectification order, which may conveniently be referred to as the second rectification order. As already stated, by the first rectification order, the ITO had added as interest an amount of Rs. 19,632 to the WDV of three tractors. Even according to the ledger maintained by the assessee, there has been no payment of any interest with regard to the third tractor bearing No. 619C No. II. There has been such payment of interest only with regard to the other two tractors. The ITO had, therefore, committed an error in adding the interest amount of Rs. 19,632 to the WDV in the case of the third tractor in the first rectification order. This is clearly a mistake apparent from the records’. It was to correct this mistake that the ITO passed the second rectification order. By the same, he reduced the WDV of the third tractor by the amount of interest, which had been wrongly added to the same. Thus, by the second rectification order, the ITO did not withdraw any relief given by the original assessment order. He only corrected a mistake committed in the first rectification order, which of course, will have the effect of reducing the relief granted by the first rectification order.\n<\/p>\n
3.  The assessee filed an appeal against the second  rectification   order. He raised two contentions. One was  that the  order is barred by limitation, as the order has been passed beyond four years of the original  assessment. The second was that the issue covered  by the  second  rectification order was a debatable one and that the mistake was not apparent from the records. The first contention was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), as the second rectification was  within four years  of the first rectification order. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, accepted the second contention and cancelled the second rectification order.\n<\/p>\n
4.  In its appeal, the department questions the correctness of the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the issue involved in the second   rectification order was a debatable one and that the mistake corrected   was not one apparent from the records. The facts leading to  the passing of the rectification order have been set out in paragraph No. 2 above. The learned counsel for the assessee was not able  to refute  these facts. It is clear from the facts stated that the adding of interest  amount to the   WDV in the case of the third tractor, was a mistake apparent from the records. No debatable  issue was  involved  in  the  correction  of this   mistake. The Commissioner (Appeals)  has,  therefore,  erred  in cancelling   the second rectification order on the ground that the error was not apparent from the records.\n<\/p>\n
5.  In the cross-objection,  the  assessee  questions the correctness   of the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the second rectification   order was not barred by limitation. As already stated,  the second rectification order was beyond four years of the original assessment order but was within four years of the first rectification order,<\/p>\n
6.  Section 154(l)(a) confers  powers on the ITO to amend any order of assessment or of refund or any other order passed by him’. The first   contention advanced  by  the  learned counsel for the  assessee was that this provision authorises the ITO  to amend  only an assessment order or a refund order or any other  original order  and   not an earlier rectification order. It was claimed that a rectification order has no independent existence as by that order, what is done is only to correct the assessment order. It was, therefore, claimed that no earlier rectification  order was available for further rectification and that what could be rectified is only the original assessment order as rectified by an earlier rectification order.\n<\/p>\n
7.  We are unable to accept this contention. In   our view,  the words ‘any other order’ in Section 154(l)(a) will include an earlier  rectification order. The rectification order has an independent existence. Even   an appeal has been allowed from the order. There may be cases   where the mistake is only in the rectification  order and it  may not even  be reflected in the assessment order as corrected by the rectification order. We are, therefore, of the view that a mistake apparent from the records in an earlier rectification order can be corrected  by a subsequent rectification  order under Section 154(l)(o).\n<\/p>\n
8.  The second contention advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee was that although the mistake occurred in the first rectification  order, the mistake became part and parcel of the  original assessment   order on the passing of the first rectification order, that any subsequent   rectification of the mistake will be the rectification of a mistake in the original assessment order and that such a rectification is possible only within four years of the date of the original assessment  order. In  support  of this   contention, the learned counsel relied upon   the decision  of the  Gujarat High Court in Ahmedabad Sarangpur Mills Co.  Ltd.  v.   A.S.  Manohar,  ITO [1976] 102 ITR 712 and that of the Calcutta High Court in Bengal Assam Steamship Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 327. On the other hand, it was  contended by the learned  departmental representative that the mistake was in the first rectification order, that the same could be corrected within four   years of the passing of the first rectification order and that the fact that the first rectification order may  effect certain   changes in the original assessment order is totally irrelevant.\n<\/p>\n
9.  We have considered the matter. In   the   case of Ahmedabad Sarangpur Mills Co. Ltd. (supra), the mistake sought   to be   corrected  by the second rectification order was not one occurring in the first rectification   order. It was a mistake which  existed in the assessment order even before   the passing of the earlier rectification order. In   dealing with this   matter, the Gujarat High Court observed that :\n<\/p>\n
 … Even assuming as contended by the learned counsel for the  revenue that the limitation should   commence to run from the first rectification order of May 21, 1965, even then, what was sought to be rectified was the mistake which was committed by the Income-tax Officer in allowing the set off of the loss of assessment year 1954-55 against the business income of the petitioner-company for the relevant assessment year 1961-62. In the aforesaid first rectification order of May 21,1965, the Income-tax Officer had taken the same amount, namely, Rs. 12,39,626, as loss for assessment year 1954-55. It, therefore, cannot be said that what was sought to be done by the respondent herein was in effect and substance the rectification of the order of May 21, 1965. …\n<\/p>\n
In the case of Bengal Assam Steamship Co. Ltd. (supra), from the facts available in the judgment, it would appear that the second rectification was sought with regard to certain mistakes in the original assessment orders and that the mistakes were not connected with the earlier rectification orders. We are inclined to accept the contention of the learned departmental representative that, in the present case, what the ITO has rectified is a mistake committed in the earlier rectification order. We have already held that a rectification order has an independent existence and that it could be rectified by a subsequent rectification order. We are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the rectification of a mistake in the earlier rectification order , will amount to rectification of a mistake in the assessment order. If the contention of the assessee is accepted, the ITO will find himself helpless in correcting an accidental error or mistake committed in a rectification order passed by him on the eve of the expiry of four years from the date of the assessment order. This will cause hardship not only to the department but to the assessee also. We are, therefore, of the view that when the mistake sought to be rectified is essentially one committed in the earlier rectification order, the period of limitation for rectifying the mistake should be reckoned from the date of the earlier rectification order and not from the date of the original assessment order. The following commentary of Chaturvedi and Pithisaria’s on Income-tax Law, 3rd edition, volume 3, lends support to the above view :\n<\/p>\n
 … However, where the rectification order itself is to be rectified, the period of limitation starts from the date of the first rectification order and not the original order.\n<\/p>\n
The rectification order under appeal is, therefore, within time.\n<\/p>\n
10. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the cross-objection is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Cochin Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 Equivalent citations: 1985 11 ITD 620 Coch Bench: K Menon, A Satyanarayana ORDER K.B. Menon, Judicial Member 1. This appeal by the department and the cross-objection by the assessee relate to the assessment year 1967-68. The first assessment in the […]<\/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":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97068","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nIncome-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - 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\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\" \/>\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=\"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-17T19:13:21+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\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984\",\"datePublished\":\"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-17T19:13:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\"},\"wordCount\":1654,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\",\"name\":\"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-17T19:13:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984\"}]},{\"@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":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - 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\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-17T19:13:21+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\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984","datePublished":"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-17T19:13:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984"},"wordCount":1654,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984","name":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1984-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-17T19:13:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/income-tax-officer-vs-nechupadom-constructions-on-12-october-1984#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Income-Tax Officer vs Nechupadom Constructions on 12 October, 1984"}]},{"@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\/97068","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=97068"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97068\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97068"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97068"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97068"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}