https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168270 The explanation to Section 7(2) of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 was confined to excess stock up to five maunds above the maximum prescribed by the control order and could not be expanded to create a five-maund grace over the separate limit in the proviso to Section 7(2)(b). The term "person" in paragraph 10 of the West Bengal Foodgrains Control Order, 1951 was wide enough to include joint possessors, so a common holding could not be split to claim the maximum quantity separately for each individual. The household explanation applied only where the stock was in the possession or control of household members, with liability then falling on the head of the household. en-us Wed, 18 Feb 1953 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168270 The explanation to Section 7(2) of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 was confined to excess stock up to five maunds above the maximum prescribed by the control order and could not be expanded to create a five-maund grace over the separate limit in the proviso to Section 7(2)(b). The term "person" in paragraph 10 of the West Bengal Foodgrains Control Order, 1951 was wide enough to include joint possessors, so a common holding could not be split to claim the maximum quantity separately for each individual. The household explanation applied only where the stock was in the possession or control of household members, with liability then falling on the head of the household. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Feb 1953 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168270